News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Linux futex_wait() bug – update to latest patches now by kasabali on Thursday May 14, 2015 @06:54AM (#9544323)
Thanks, I've corrected the links, please check them again to see they are pre-regression versions [1]

> Not true, it is architecture independent (commit also mentions Android)

I saw it (and arm64 comment in this thread) but I didn't include them because I don't think it would be a production-serious issue there. Thanks for clarification.

> Please check your facts next time.

Thanks to your post I've corrected links, but no need for such an aggressive tone, huh? Maybe you should try to be more polite in your next refutal tries?

[1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/b0c29f79ecea0b6fbce...

Re:Linux futex_wait() bug – update to latest patches now by buster on Thursday May 14, 2015 @07:03AM (#9544357)
Please note that i was just looking for the missing default case. It might still be the case that the bug is not in precise..

The patch also replaces atomic_inc() with futex_get_mm():

  -		atomic_inc(&key->private.mm->mm_count);
  +		futex_get_mm(key); /* implies MB (B) */
And your links are using atomic_inc().. What that means with regards to this bug? I don't know.
Re:Linux futex_wait() bug – update to latest patches now by kasabali on Thursday May 14, 2015 @07:11AM (#9544381)
Fix commit and OP claims bug was introduced in [1], which has been never backported to 3.2.x, so I assume lack of default case was not a problem before that commit.

> And your links are using atomic_inc().. What that means with regards to this bug? I don't know.

It means they are simply old versions and they were never affected by the bug, if we believe the commit message of the fix commit and OP.

[1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/b0c29f79ecea0b6fbce...

Re:Linux futex_wait() bug – update to latest patches now by buster on Thursday May 14, 2015 @08:23AM (#9544672)
Or not recognized.. But you are right, i suppose that the atomic_inc() doesn't need a memory barrier because it's atomic and the new function may need one, guessing.