linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] Generic smp_call_function(), improvements, and smp_call_function

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Sat, 22 Mar 2008 13:29:03 +0100
From:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, npiggin@...e.de, paulus@...ba.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Generic smp_call_function(), improvements, and smp_call_function_single()

On Fri, Mar 21 2008, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > My thinking was that it may need a bit of help to ensure that the init
> > function for single call data works,
> 
> The problem may be worse than that.  I see that you have a per-cpu
> "call_single_queue" on which you do some list operations.  On ia64
> the per-cpu variables live at the same virtual address on each processor
> with a per-cpu TLB mapping directing them to a different physical
> address on each.  This makes Linux lists very confused.

Funky, how does accessing other CPU's per-cpu variables work on ia64
then? Perhaps I made some false assumptions. Unfortunately I have no
access to any IA64 machines, so I either have to yank the ia64 bits
(which is unfortunate, since Alan tests on those :-) or rely on a bit of
help from you and/or others in getting that bit right.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/