linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] smpboot: cachesize comparison fix in smp_tune

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, 25 May 2007 08:06:09 +0200
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] smpboot: cachesize comparison fix in smp_tune_scheduling()

On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 04:02:07PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2007 12:33:23 +0200
> Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > smpboot: cachesize comparison fix in smp_tune_scheduling()
> > 
> > boot_cpu_data.x86_cache_size is signed int and can be < 0 too.
...
> Under what conditions can boot_cpu_data.x86_cache_size be negative?
> 
> Have negative values of boot_cpu_data.x86_cache_size been observed in
> practice?

Sorry, but IMHO every observations are only kind of illusions,
and should have no influence on any serious science, including
computer science.

But, from smpboot.c history:

"[PATCH] i386: Clean up smp_tune_scheduling()
Adrian Bunk [Thu, 7 Dec 2006 01:14:19 +0000 (02:14 +0100)]
- remove the write-only local variable "bandwidth"
- don't set "max_cache_size" in the (cachesize < 0) case:
  that's already handled in kernel/sched.c:measure_migration_cost()"

So, it seems such strange phenomenon could've been observed
long time ago...

Thanks,
Jarek P.
-
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/