lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 21 Dec 2022 01:58:58 +0100
From:   Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] srcu: Remove pre-flip memory barrier

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 01:49:57AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 07:15:00PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 5:45 PM Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org> wrote:
> > Agreed about (1).
> > 
> > > _ In (2), E pairs with the address-dependency between idx and lock_count.
> > 
> > But that is not the only reason. If that was the only reason for (2),
> > then there is an smp_mb() just before the next-scan post-flip before
> > the lock counts are read.
> 
> The post-flip barrier makes sure the new idx is visible on the next READER's
> turn, but it doesn't protect against the fact that "READ idx then WRITE lock[idx]"
> may appear unordered from the update side POV if there is no barrier between the
> scan and the flip.
> 
> If you remove the smp_mb() from the litmus test I sent, things explode.

Or rather, look at it the other way, if there is no barrier between the lock
scan and the index flip (E), then the index flip can appear to be written before the
lock is read. Which means you may start activating the index before you finish
reading it (at least it appears that way from the readers pont of view).

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ