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]
Date:   Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:04:20 +0200
From:   "Lino Sanfilippo" <LinoSanfilippo@....de>
To:     "Sinan Kaya" <okaya@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     "Jeff Kirsher" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
        "Alexander Duyck" <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
        intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Timur Tabi" <timur@...eaurora.org>, sulrich@...eaurora.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v7 0/7] netdev: intel: Eliminate duplicate barriers
 on weakly-ordered archs

Hi,

> Double sorry now.
> 
> I don't know if you have been following "RFC on writel and writel_relaxed" thread
> or not but there are some new developments about wmb() requirement. 

Just out of interest: Where can this thread be found?

> 
> Basically, wmb() should never be used before writel() as writel() seem to
> provide coherency and observability guarantee.
> 

AFAIU memory-barriers.txt writel() only guarantees correct order of accesses to
IO-memory not RAM vs. IO-memory (this may be the case for some architectures 
where the writel() implementation contains a wmb() but not for all).
For the RAM vs. IO-memory case at least a a wmb()/rmb() has to be used. 
Is this not correct? 

Regards,
Lino

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ