netdev - Re: [PATCH 02/34]bnx2x: Barriers for the compiler

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20090117.232545.32388782.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sat, 17 Jan 2009 23:25:45 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eilong@...adcom.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/34]bnx2x: Barriers for the compiler

From: "Eilon Greenstein" <eilong@...adcom.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:50:57 +0200

> On Wed, 2009-01-14 at 13:13 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > From: "Eilon Greenstein" <eilong@...adcom.com>
> > Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:42:44 +0200
> > 
> > > To make sure no swapping are made by the compiler, changed HAS_WORK to inline
> > > functions and added all the necessary barriers
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Eilon Greenstein <eilong@...adcom.com>
> > 
> > Don't you need cpu memory barriers too?  What if the cpu reorders what
> > you're trying to order using just a compiler barrier?
> > 
> The CPU memory barriers are in place (actually, they needed some fixing,
> but that was in another patch) - this one is just for the compiler and
> after reviewing it again now, I still believe that it is sufficient. I
> need the current executing CPU to take the right decision based on what
> it currently knows - synchronization between CPUs and HW is using CPU
> memory barrier.
> 
> IMHO this patch is correct.

Fair enough, applied.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html