linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Lock and Pointer guards

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 29 May 2023 13:29:37 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, keescook@...omium.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ojeda@...nel.org,
        ndesaulniers@...gle.com, mingo@...hat.com, will@...nel.org,
        longman@...hat.com, boqun.feng@...il.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
        bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com, paulmck@...nel.org,
        frederic@...nel.org, quic_neeraju@...cinc.com,
        joel@...lfernandes.org, josh@...htriplett.org,
        mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
        qiang1.zhang@...el.com, rcu@...r.kernel.org, tj@...nel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Lock and Pointer guards

On 5/26/23 17:05, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> My initial (failed) attempts tried to combine __cleanup, _Generic and
> __auto_type, but the compilers refused. I've also Googled around and found
> (among many others) the QEMU and Glib guards. However I don't like them because
> they end up relying on function pointers/indirect calls.
> 
> Hence the current pile of CPP hackery.. no indirect calls in sight.

QEMU's guards in practice also compiles down to direct calls, but yes 
that's only after the compiler inlines everything in the vtable.  I did 
it that way because the polymorphic locks already existed before, 
otherwise your solution with Linus's tweak for "bool" is as nice as it 
can be.  I like that it extends to irqoff and irqsave sections.

Paolo