linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: Quark: Add legacy_cache

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:	Wed, 1 Oct 2014 10:57:14 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Bryan O'Donoghue <pure.logic@...us-software.ie>
cc:	mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, davej@...hat.com, hmh@....eng.br,
	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: Quark: Add legacy_cache_size and TLB comments

On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> On 01/10/14 01:11, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On the substance.
> I'm certainly not trying to antagonise you here - I assumed you were
> *suggesting* to apply those comments directly ?
> Which is why I updated the sent patches with your comments - since they
> seemed more descriptive anyway - and sent back to the list.

That part is fine. What really annoyed me is the patch:

Subject: [PATCH] x86: Call identify_cpu() unconditionally once remove other
     callsites

which is a complete fail in all aspects. You should be able to figure
that out yourself easily:

Read the reviews of "[PATCH 1/3] x86: Bugfix bit-rot in the calling of
legacy_cache_size" again carefully. Then look at your patch, the
subject line and the changelog. It should be pretty obvious.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/