linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] cpumask: Change cpumask_of_cpu to use cpumask_of_cpu

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:	Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:37:48 -0700
From:	Mike Travis <travis@....com>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Lennert Buytenhek <kernel@...tstofly.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>,
	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Tigran Aivazian <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	Sam Creasey <sammy@...my.net>, Greg Banks <gnb@....com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andreas Schwab <schwab@...e.de>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] cpumask: Change cpumask_of_cpu to use cpumask_of_cpu_map

Mike Travis wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
>> On Thursday 24 July 2008 03:18:42 Mike Travis wrote:
>>>     Note that the declaration of cpumask_of_cpu_map[] is initialized
>>>     so that cpumask_of_cpu(0) is defined early.  This assumes that
>>>     cpu 0 is the boot cpu.
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>>    Make this statically initialized please.  That almost guarantees there'll
>> be no problems.  It's a little tricky to do, but possible.  Patch below
>> tested on 32 bit x86 only.
> 
> I thought about it, but it didn't seem to be worth the effort.  One problem
> though, the cpumask bits are such that the LSB of the last word is cpu 0.
> So your initializer sets it up in reverse order.  I'll see if I can't
> figure out how to invert it (very tricky coding btw... ;-)

I thought since the cpumask_scnprintf prints out the bit map with the LSB
being cpu 0 that the bit layout was the same.  Further examination reveals
I was wrong about that.

The updated patchset to follow shortly after a bit more testing...

Thanks,
Mike
--
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/