Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 18:47:44 +0000 From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> To: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, 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 Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 06:46:30PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 09:43:00AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > > > 1) kref: Used for honest-to-goodness reference counters that want > > > overflow protection. Uses a new type: atomic_nowrap_t that has > > > HARDENED_ATOMIC protection. > > > > Based on other feedback, it sounds like we're better off with > > refcount_t (which kref could be implemented on top of). And refcount_t > > would have a limited API: inc, dec_and_test (or whatever is determined > > as sanely minimal). > > > > > 2) statistical counters: Atomic in all cases, but wraps. > > > > Yup. sequence_t seems to make the most sense on naming, I think. If we > > want to get crazy, the type could be sequence_wrap_t. > > Why? atomic_t is still perfectly fine here, right? Having a name that clearly highlights the intended use-case makes it much more obvious what the expected semantics are, and when it is being abused. If atomic_t were rarely used directly, bad uses are less likely to get cargo-culted into new code. That said, a plethora of use-case specific aliases for the same underlying implementation is also problematic. Thanks, Mark.
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.