linux-kernel - Re: Internal vs. external barriers (was: Re: Interesting LKMM litmus test)

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]

Message-ID: <Y87vOLaPBapOzos9@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date:   Mon, 23 Jan 2023 15:34:00 -0500
From:   Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To:     Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@...weicloud.com>
Cc:     paulmck@...nel.org, Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
        Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@...wei.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, will <will@...nel.org>,
        "boqun.feng" <boqun.feng@...il.com>, npiggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        dhowells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        "j.alglave" <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
        "luc.maranget" <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>, akiyks <akiyks@...il.com>,
        dlustig <dlustig@...dia.com>, joel <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        urezki <urezki@...il.com>,
        quic_neeraju <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
        frederic <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Internal vs. external barriers (was: Re: Interesting LKMM litmus
 test)

On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 08:40:24PM +0100, Jonas Oberhauser wrote:
> 
> 
> On 1/23/2023 4:55 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> > I'm inclined to add this check to the memory model.  Would you prefer to
> > submit it yourself as a separate patch?  Or are you happy to have it
> > merged with my patch, and if so, do you have a final, preferred form for
> > the check?
> 
> After clearing my confusion, I'm no longer sure if it should be added. If
> you're still inclined to have it, I would prefer to submit the patch, but
> I'd like to define the use-cookie relation (= (data|[~Srcu-unlock];rfe)+)
> and use it also to clarify the srcu match definition (I almost would like to
> do that anyways :D).
> Is that ok?

Write up a patch and we can all judge it.

Alan