From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Jan Glauber <jglauber@marvell.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Jayachandran Chandrasekharan Nair <jnair@marvell.com>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] arm64: kernel: implement fast refcount checking
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2019 14:38:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201907291437.78313B08@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190729172414.odpcqugvtcwjnbe5@willie-the-truck>
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 06:24:15PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 10:27:07AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 06:11:42PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 09:43:54AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > > (Also, what happened to the *_checked() variations?)
> > >
> > > The new implementation is intended to replace the *_checked() variants,
> > > and the discrepancy in naming doesn't make any sense to me once everything
> > > is inline in the header file. Am I missing something?
> >
> > I haven't looked at the resulting builds, but the reason for the
> > _checked() macro stuff was to provide a way for callers to opt into a
> > checked refcount_t regardless of the state of REFCOUNT_FULL (especially
> > for architectures without special refcount handling). If that is
> > retained, then all is well. It just looked odd to me in the patch.
>
> Hmm, so that has a grand total of zero users in mainline afaict. Do you
> expect that to change?
Hm, I thought Mark Rutland had one (or plans for now)... adding to Cc.
But yeah, if nothing is using it, away it goes! ;)
--
Kees Cook
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-29 21:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-19 10:54 [PATCH v5] arm64: kernel: implement fast refcount checking Ard Biesheuvel
2019-06-19 10:56 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-06-20 11:03 ` Jan Glauber
2019-06-20 18:10 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-24 6:37 ` Hanjun Guo
2019-07-03 13:40 ` Will Deacon
2019-07-03 18:12 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-07-10 12:21 ` Will Deacon
2019-07-15 12:44 ` Jan Glauber
2019-07-17 12:53 ` Hanjun Guo
2019-07-17 13:23 ` Hanjun Guo
2019-07-22 16:43 ` Kees Cook
2019-07-22 17:11 ` Will Deacon
2019-07-22 17:27 ` Kees Cook
2019-07-29 17:24 ` Will Deacon
2019-07-29 21:38 ` Kees Cook [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201907291437.78313B08@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=jglauber@marvell.com \
--cc=jnair@marvell.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.