linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] locking/atomic/x86: Rewrite x86_32 arch_atomic64_{,fetch}

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: <CAFULd4bBmQ85UsPOOEA+5dj-_JOBNWeyM-jipM7Zov2V484quQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 14:03:42 +0200
From: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, 
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, 
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] locking/atomic/x86: Rewrite x86_32
 arch_atomic64_{,fetch}_{and,or,xor}() functions

On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 1:13 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:

> >  static __always_inline void arch_atomic64_and(s64 i, atomic64_t *v)
> >  {
> > -     s64 old, c = 0;
> > +     s64 val = __READ_ONCE(v->counter);
>
> I reckon it's worth placing this in a helper with a big comment, e.g.
>
> static __always_inline s64 arch_atomic64_read_tearable(atomic64_t *v)
> {
>         /*
>          * TODO: explain that this might be torn, but it occurs *once*, and can
>          * safely be consumed by atomic64_try_cmpxchg().
>          *
>          * TODO: point to the existing commentary regarding why we use
>          * __READ_ONCE() for KASAN reasons.
>          */
>         return __READ_ONCE(v->counter);
> }
>
> ... and then use that in each of the instances below.
>
> That way the subtlety is clearly documented, and it'd more clearly align with
> the x86_64 verions.

This is an excellent idea. The separate definitions needs to be placed
in atomic64_32.h and atomic_64_64.h (due to use of atomic64_t
typedef), but it will allow the same unification of functions between
x64_32 and x64_64 as the approach with __READ_ONCE().

Thanks,
Uros.