linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 02/15] locking/local_lock: Add local nested BH locking infrastructure.

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <875xuk26yd.ffs@tglx>
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2024 15:55:22 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
 <bristot@...nel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Daniel Borkmann
 <daniel@...earbox.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Frederic
 Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jakub
 Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Peter
 Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Will
 Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
 <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 02/15] locking/local_lock: Add local nested
 BH locking infrastructure.

On Fri, Jun 07 2024 at 08:53, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Add local_lock_nested_bh() locking. It is based on local_lock_t and the
> naming follows the preempt_disable_nested() example.
>
> For !PREEMPT_RT + !LOCKDEP it is a per-CPU annotation for locking
> assumptions based on local_bh_disable(). The macro is optimized away
> during compilation.
> For !PREEMPT_RT + LOCKDEP the local_lock_nested_bh() is reduced to
> the usual lock-acquire plus lockdep_assert_in_softirq() - ensuring that
> BH is disabled.
>
> For PREEMPT_RT local_lock_nested_bh() acquires the specified per-CPU
> lock. It does not disable CPU migration because it relies on
> local_bh_disable() disabling CPU migration.
> With LOCKDEP it performans the usual lockdep checks as with !PREEMPT_RT.
> Due to include hell the softirq check has been moved spinlock.c.
>
> The intention is to use this locking in places where locking of a per-CPU
> variable relies on BH being disabled. Instead of treating disabled
> bottom halves as a big per-CPU lock, PREEMPT_RT can use this to reduce
> the locking scope to what actually needs protecting.
> A side effect is that it also documents the protection scope of the
> per-CPU variables.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>

Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>