linux-kernel - Re: BUG: using smp_processor_id() during suspend with 2.6.25-rc8

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:	Fri, 11 Apr 2008 17:27:32 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@...il.com>,
	Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: BUG: using smp_processor_id() during suspend with 2.6.25-rc8

On Friday, 11 of April 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > thanks Pavel, i picked this up into sched-devel.git - it makes sense 
> > independently of whether it solves the warning.
> 
> This means the CPU preempt sanity checking is effectively disabled
> on UP kernels. Even though more and more people should run multi-core
> now there is still a sizeable user base left on single core.
> 
> Don't think this is a good idea. We need even the UP testers.

Agreed.

Besides, I'd like to learn what caused the problem to appear in the first
place.

> If he wants this for suspend or machine check/oops (always useful there
> to disable such warnings) then there should
> be separate checks for this. Perhaps system_state could be enhanced for this?

That would make sense.

Thanks,
Rafael
--
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/