linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86_64 irq: reuse vector for set_xxx_irq

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]

Message-ID: <20061023212946.GA4354@rhun.haifa.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 23 Oct 2006 23:29:46 +0200
From:	Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...ibm.com>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
Cc:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai.lu@....com>, Andi Kleen <ak@....de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64 irq: reuse vector for set_xxx_irq_affinity in phys flat mode

On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 10:45:19PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 09:32:57AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > "Yinghai Lu" <yinghai.lu@....com> writes:
> > 
> > > in phys flat mode, when using set_xxx_irq_affinity to irq balance from
> > > one cpu to another,  _assign_irq_vector will get to increase last used
> > > vector and get new vector. this will use up the vector if enough
> > > set_xxx_irq_affintiy are called. and end with using same vector in
> > > different cpu for different irq. (that is not what we want, we only
> > > want to use same vector in different cpu for different irq when more
> > > than 0x240 irq needed). To keep it simple, the vector should be resued
> > > from one cpu to another instead of getting new vector.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai.lu@....com>
> > 
> > YH.  I think the concept is sound.  I don't think this is a bug fix, just
> > an optimization so this may not be 2.6.19 material.  But we are thrashing
> > things so much it may make sense to include it, and it likely to keeps
> > us from running into problems, so it can be called a bug preventative :)
> >...
> 
> Is this patch intended as fix for the 2.6.19-rc regression described 
> in [1]?

No, that regression is fixed by the two x86-64 patches Eric sent in
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=116157840300001&r=1&w=2.

Cheers,
Muli
-
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/