linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND v7 4/6] arm64: futex: refactor futex atomic operation

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: <aMRR6nzqRrFGPTsN@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 18:01:30 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com>
Cc: will@...nel.org, broonie@...nel.org, maz@...nel.org,
	oliver.upton@...ux.dev, joey.gouly@....com, james.morse@....com,
	ardb@...nel.org, scott@...amperecomputing.com,
	suzuki.poulose@....com, yuzenghui@...wei.com, mark.rutland@....com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v7 4/6] arm64: futex: refactor futex atomic
 operation

On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 05:44:15PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 04:19:27PM +0100, Yeoreum Yun wrote:
> > +#define FUTEX_ATOMIC_OP(op)						\
> > +static __always_inline int						\
> > +__futex_atomic_##op(int oparg, u32 __user *uaddr, int *oval)		\
> > +{									\
> > +	return __llsc_futex_atomic_##op(oparg, uaddr, oval);		\
> > +}
> > +
> > +FUTEX_ATOMIC_OP(add)
> > +FUTEX_ATOMIC_OP(or)
> > +FUTEX_ATOMIC_OP(and)
> > +FUTEX_ATOMIC_OP(eor)
> > +FUTEX_ATOMIC_OP(set)
> > +
> > +static __always_inline int
> > +__futex_cmpxchg(u32 __user *uaddr, u32 oldval, u32 newval, u32 *oval)
> > +{
> > +	return __llsc_futex_cmpxchg(uaddr, oldval, newval, oval);
> > +}
> 
> The patch looks fine and my impression that the __futex_* functions will
> be used in patch 6 to dispatch between lsui and llsc. But you got them
> the other way around. I'll comment there.

Ah, ignore me, I misread patch 6. It looks good.

> For this patch:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>