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: <CALzJLG9Lr4VcOpYLXKNHmHLzjxDCMN6AvaTRjW7ZZEMukPdZ4w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Jan 2019 10:12:58 -0800
From:   Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...lanox.com>,
        Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next 4/4] net/mlx5: Remove spinlock support from mlx5_write64

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 8:46 AM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 12:43:14AM -0700, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > You need to do one of two things:
> > 1. Require CONFIG_64BIT and delete this 32bit code.
> > 2. Declare global mlx5 DB spinlock and use on 32bit systems, something
> > like this:
> > #if BITS_PER_LONG == 64
> >  __raw_writeq(*(u64 *)val, dest);
> > #else
> >   spin_lock_irqsave(doorbell_lock, flags);
> >   __raw_writel((__force u32) val[0], dest);
> >   __raw_writel((__force u32) val[1], dest + 4);
> >    spin_unlock_irqrestore(doorbell_lock, flags);
> > #endif
>
> And why is this code using the __raw_ versions? Seems wrong too...
>

for 64 and 32 as well?
what is wrong with the raw version ?

> Jason

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ