[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 08:54:02 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc: Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>,
NitinGote <nitin.r.gote@...el.com>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
SElinux list <selinux@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selinux: convert struct sidtab count to refcount_t
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:28:31PM +0200, Jann Horn wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 12:17 AM Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> > Perhaps we need a "statistics" counter type for these kinds of counters?
> > "counter_t"? I bet there are a lot of atomic_t uses that are just trying
> > to be counters. (likely most of atomic_t that isn't now refcount_t ...)
>
> This isn't a statistics counter though; this thing needs ordered
> memory accesses, which you wouldn't need for statistics.
Okay, it'd be a "very accurate" counter type? It _could_ be used for
statistics. I guess what I mean is that there are a lot of places using
atomic_t just for upward counting that don't care about wrapping, etc.
--
Kees Cook
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.
