linux-kernel - Re: [Fastboot] [PATCH RFC 0/5] hard_smp_processor

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 2 Mar 2007 09:44:56 +0530
From:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...ibm.com>
To:	Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>
Cc:	Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao 
	<fernando@....ntt.co.jp>, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	judith@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	fastboot@...ts.osdl.org, ak@...e.de,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Fastboot] [PATCH RFC 0/5] hard_smp_processor_id overhaul

On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 09:06:48AM -0500, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 04:16:13PM +0900, Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao wrote:
> > As a consequence, the hardcoding of hard_smp_processor_id() to 0 on UP
> > systems (see "linux/smp.h") is not correct.
> > 
> > This patch-set does the following:
> > 
> > 1- Remove hardcoding of hard_smp_processor_id on UP systems.
> 
> NAK.  This has to be configurable, as many embedded systems don't even 
> have APICs.  Please rework the patch set so that there is not any overhead 
> for existing UP systems.

Fernando did the code audit and found no instance of hard_smp_processor_id
being used for non APIC case. So are embedded systems you are referring,
patching the kernel?

Anyway, I think providing hard_smp_processor_id() definition for UP systems
without APIC does not harm.

Thanks
Vivek
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/