linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/smpboot: Make logical package management more robust

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:   Sat, 10 Dec 2016 20:13:30 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "Charles (Chas) Williams" <ciwillia@...cade.com>,
        "M. Vefa Bicakci" <m.v.b@...box.com>,
        Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>,
        xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
        Juergen Groß <jgross@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/smpboot: Make logical package management more
 robust

On Sat, 10 Dec 2016, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Dec 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> > On 12/09/2016 06:02 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> > > On 12/09/2016 05:06 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 8 Dec 2016, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Boris, can you please verify if that makes the
> > > > topology_update_package_map() call which you placed into the Xen cpu
> > > > starting code obsolete ?
> > > 
> > > Will do. I did test your patch but without removing
> > > topology_update_package_map() call. It complained about package IDs
> > > being wrong, but that's expected until I fix Xen part.
> > 
> > Ignore my statement about earlier testing --- it was all on single-node
> > machines.
> > 
> > Something is broken with multi-node on Intel, but failure modes are different.
> > Prior to this patch build_sched_domain() reports an error and pretty soon we
> > crash in scheduler (don't remember off the top of my head). With patch applied
> > I crash mush later, when one of the drivers does kmalloc_node(..,
> > cpu_to_node(cpu)) and cpu_to_node() returns 1, which should never happen
> > ("x86: Booted up 1 node, 32 CPUs" is reported, for example).
> 
> Hmm. But the cpu_to_node() association is unrelated to the logical package
> management.

Just came to my mind after hitting send. We had the whole persistent cpuid
to nodeid association work merged in 4.9. So that might be related.

Thanks,

	tglx