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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).