[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2236FBA76BA1254E88B949DDB74E612B41BDE8BB@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:47:02 +0000
From: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>
To: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com"
<kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
CC: Colin Vidal <colin@...dal.org>, AKASHI Takahiro
<takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>, "paulus@...ba.org" <paulus@...ba.org>
Subject: RE: RE: atomic64_wrap_t generic implementation
>I think it best to leave the definitions in asm-generic/atomic64.h.
>While not used on x86, there are other architectures lacking 64-bit atomic operations that need this definition of atomic64_t (and its associated implementation with hashed spinlocks): this original feature was added in support of the perf_counter >subsystem [1]; yet another perf-related exception. If we want the support of HARDENED_ATOMIC to extend to these other architectures, I think we should leave this in there.
Fair point. So, I let them live where they are now.
Best Regards,
Elena
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
