linux-kernel - [PATCH memory-model 3/4] Documentation/atomic_t: Emphasize that failed atomic operations give no ordering

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,  1 May 2024 16:21:31 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@...a.com,
	mingo@...nel.org
Cc: stern@...land.harvard.edu,
	parri.andrea@...il.com,
	will@...nel.org,
	peterz@...radead.org,
	boqun.feng@...il.com,
	npiggin@...il.com,
	dhowells@...hat.com,
	j.alglave@....ac.uk,
	luc.maranget@...ia.fr,
	akiyks@...il.com,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
	Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
	Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH memory-model 3/4] Documentation/atomic_t: Emphasize that failed atomic operations give no ordering

The ORDERING section of Documentation/atomic_t.txt can easily be read as
saying that conditional atomic RMW operations that fail are ordered when
those operations have the _acquire() or _release() suffixes.  This is
not the case, therefore update this section to make it clear that failed
conditional atomic RMW operations provide no ordering.

Reported-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>
Cc: Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>
Cc: Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
---
 Documentation/atomic_t.txt | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/atomic_t.txt b/Documentation/atomic_t.txt
index d7adc6d543db4..bee3b1bca9a7b 100644
--- a/Documentation/atomic_t.txt
+++ b/Documentation/atomic_t.txt
@@ -171,14 +171,14 @@ The rule of thumb:
  - RMW operations that are conditional are unordered on FAILURE,
    otherwise the above rules apply.
 
-Except of course when an operation has an explicit ordering like:
+Except of course when a successful operation has an explicit ordering like:
 
  {}_relaxed: unordered
  {}_acquire: the R of the RMW (or atomic_read) is an ACQUIRE
  {}_release: the W of the RMW (or atomic_set)  is a  RELEASE
 
 Where 'unordered' is against other memory locations. Address dependencies are
-not defeated.
+not defeated.  Conditional operations are still unordered on FAILURE.
 
 Fully ordered primitives are ordered against everything prior and everything
 subsequent. Therefore a fully ordered primitive is like having an smp_mb()
-- 
2.40.1