|
Message-ID: <20161129093159.GD3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:31:59 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru> Cc: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, "will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>, David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>, david@...son.dropbear.id.au Subject: Re: Conversion from atomic_t to refcount_t: summary of issues On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 02:19:56PM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 28/11/16 23:13, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 11:56:17AM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote: > >> First, about the types. > >> We do have a number of instances of atomic_long_t used as refcounters, see below: > > > > Right, those were expected. We could do long_refcount_t I suppose. > > > >> And yes, we *do* have at least one instance (again not 100% finished, > >> more might show up) of atomic64_t used as refcounter: > >> > >> arch/powerpc/mm/mmu_context_iommu.c: > >> struct mm_iommu_table_group_mem_t { > >> ... > >> atomic64_t mapped; > >> ... > >> } > > > > *urgh*, Alexey does that really need to be atomic64_t ? Wouldn't > > atomic_long_t work for you? > > > It would, this code only works in 64bit where long==64bit anyway (in fact > even 32bit variant would do). > Thanks, we'll convert it to a 32bit refcount then.
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.