linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: implement multiple queues for smp function call IPIs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 1 Aug 2008 16:17:43 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: implement multiple queues for smp function call IPIs

> So ... how about my original suggestion, to add a (default-off) boot 
> option that reduces the queues to 1? I.e. lets have something in place 
> from day 1 on that could be quirk-handler-driven, should the need arise. 
> "apic=simpleipi" or something like that.
> 
> In a year or two, once this all has proven itself fine on a broad range 
> of systems, we'll laugh out loud at being so cautious and can remove the 
> boot option for good ;-)

I agree that adding a boot option to turn it off is a good idea (assuming
it doesn't take too much code to implement) Adding such paranoid boot options early 
has saved my ass a few times in the past.

Only tricky bit is use if () not "modulo variable", because the if ()
will be much faster than a division through an arbitary number.

-Andi
--
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/