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:	Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:15:47 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <>
To:	Denys Vlasenko <>
cc:	Paul Mackerras <>,
	Satyam Sharma <>,
	Stefan Richter <>,
	Chris Snook <>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,,
	Linus Torvalds <>,, Andrew Morton <>,,,,,,,,,,,,,
	Herbert Xu <>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all

On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Denys Vlasenko wrote:

> On Thursday 16 August 2007 00:22, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > Satyam Sharma writes:
> > In the kernel we use atomic variables in precisely those situations
> > where a variable is potentially accessed concurrently by multiple
> > CPUs, and where each CPU needs to see updates done by other CPUs in a
> > timely fashion.  That is what they are for.  Therefore the compiler
> > must not cache values of atomic variables in registers; each
> > atomic_read must result in a load and each atomic_set must result in a
> > store.  Anything else will just lead to subtle bugs.
> Amen.

A "timely" fashion? One cannot rely on something like that when coding. 
The visibility of updates is insured by barriers and not by some fuzzy 
notion of "timeliness".
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists