linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 2/5] rust: sync: Arc: Introduces ArcInner::count()

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: <Y9y21JyuPF1nCCzr@Boquns-Mac-mini.local>
Date:   Thu, 2 Feb 2023 23:25:08 -0800
From:   Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
        Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
        Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
        Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/5] rust: sync: Arc: Introduces ArcInner::count()

On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 06:22:15AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 10:47:12PM +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 5:52 PM Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > As I said, I'm open to remove the printing of the refcount, and if you
> > > and Peter think maybe it's OK to do that after the explanation above,
> > 
> > Perhaps part of the confusion came from the overloaded "safe" term.
> > 
> > When Gary and Boqun used the term "safe", they meant it in the Rust
> > sense, i.e. calling the method will not allow to introduce undefined
> > behavior. While I think Peter and Greg are using the term to mean
> > something different.
> 
> Yes, I mean it in a "this is not giving you the value you think you are
> getting and you can not rely on it for anything at all as it is going to
> be incorrect" meaning.
> 
> Which in kernel code means "this is not something you should do".
> 

Now what really confuses me is why kref_read() is safe.. or how this is
different than kref_read(). Needless to say that ArcInner::count() can
guarantee not reading 0 (because of the type invariants) but kref_read()
cannot..

Regards,
Boqun

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h