[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161116173243.GX3142@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:32:43 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
David Windsor <dave@...gbits.org>,
Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC v4 PATCH 00/13] HARDENED_ATOMIC
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 12:09:16PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 09:23 -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> > Right, but it's the continuing atomic_t use that concerns me...
>
> Can we remove inc_not_zero and dec_and_test functionality
> from the atomic_t macros?
>
> It would require fixing all of the in tree code, and after
> that people with out of tree code would have to switch to
> refcount_t to make their code work again.
People will just use (atomic_add_return(-1, &refcount) == 0) instead, or
any other variant along those lines.
And the inc_not_zero() users are typically more advanced, since that
almost always implies them using RCU.
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.
