linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses

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]

Message-ID: <m1ej61fdyr.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org>
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:42:52 -0700
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses

Mike Travis <travis@....com> writes:

> Btw, the "zero_based_only" patch (w/o the pda folded into the percpu
> area) gets to the point shown below.  Dropping NR_CPUS from 4096 to 256
> clears up the error.  So except for the "stack overflow" message I got
> yesterday, the result is the same.  As soon as I get a chance, I'll try
> it out with gcc-4.2.0 to see if it changed the boot up problem.

Thanks that seems to confirm the suspicion that it the zero based percpu
segment that is causing problems.

In this case it appears that the notifier block for one of the cpu notifiers
got stomped, or never got initialized.

Eric
--
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/