linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 01/01][retry 1] x86: L3 cache index disable for 2.6.26

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:	Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:01:46 -0500
From:	"Langsdorf, Mark" <mark.langsdorf@....com>
To:	"Pavel Machek" <pavel@...e.cz>, "Greg KH" <greg@...ah.com>
CC:	"Deguara, Joachim" <joachim.deguara@....com>, <gregkh@....cz>,
	<tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <hpa@...or.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 01/01][retry 1] x86: L3 cache index disable for 2.6.26

> > Okay, this is a simpler version that includes most of Ingo's
> > clean-ups and style changes.  It only displays the two
> > cache index values.  Is this acceptable?
> 
> Not sure, lets ask greg. And it probably should have few lines
> in Documentation going with it, so we know new interface is added and
> how it looks.

Okay, I'll add that and resubmit tomorrow.
 
> > +static ssize_t show_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info 
> *this_leaf, char *buf)
> > +{
> > +        int node = 
> cpu_to_node(first_cpu(this_leaf->shared_cpu_map));
> > +        struct pci_dev *dev = get_k8_northbridge(node);
> > +        ssize_t ret = 0;
> > +        int i;
> > +
> > +        if (!this_leaf->can_disable) 
> > +                return sprintf(buf, "-1");
> 
> This should return -ERRNO, right?

Right, thanks.
 
> > +        for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
> > +                unsigned int reg = 0;
> > +
> > +                pci_read_config_dword(dev, 0x1BC + i * 4, &reg);
> > +
> > +                ret += sprintf(buf, "%s %x\t", buf, reg);
> > +        }
> > +	ret += sprintf(buf,"%s\n", buf);
> 
> So you print "buf" few times? Why? And you use both \t and \n 
> as deliminer...

I'm printing the values of the two config registers into
the string buffer, separated by tabs, and terminated by
an EOL.  Is there a prefered way to do that instead of
what I have?

-Mark Langsdorf
Operating System Research Center
AMD

--
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/