linux-kernel - Re: [2.6 patch] x86: revert X86

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:	Thu, 15 Nov 2007 19:07:11 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
cc:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] x86: revert X86_HT semantics change

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 05:17:03PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > The x86 unification resulted in CONFIG_X86_HT no longer being
> > set if (X86_32 && MK8).
> Yup - my bad. I wrongly assumed MK8 was an X86_64 thing.
> 
> Thanks for fixing this.
> > 
> > After grep'ing through the tree I think the problem is that different 
> > places have different assumptions about the semantics of CONFIG_X86_HT,
> > either:
> > - hyperthreading or
> > - multicore
> > and the SCHED_SMT and SCHED_MC dependencies are just one of the 
> > symptoms.
> > 
> > This should be sorted out properly, but until then we should keep the 
> > 2.6.23 status quo.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
> Acked-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
> 
> I assume Thomas & Co will forward the patch.

After looking what does what and fixing it. 

Right now this patch is not a 1:1 replacement of the .23 status quo,
as it now makes SCHED_SMT and SCHED_HT depend on !MK8 for 64bit.

     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/