linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -tip] x86: apic LVTT - use APIC

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080712073702.GA10429@elte.hu>
Date:	Sat, 12 Jul 2008 09:37:02 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] x86: apic LVTT - use APIC_DIVISOR on 64bit mode


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > We use APIC_TDR_DIV_16 while setting APIC_TDCR (divisor) it happened 
> > this moment is hidden from __setup_APIC_LVTT caller. So we better 
> > increment caller 'clocks' value to not change current behaviour and 
> > use APIC_DIVISOR (as already done in 32bit version).
> > 
> > The main benefit - unified procedure code for 32/64bit modes.
> 
> > Please review carefully. Any comments are welcome.
> > I'm _not_ 100% sure if this patch is safe.
> 
> hm, how about the other caller to __setup_APIC_LVTT(), 
> lapic_timer_setup():
> 
>         case CLOCK_EVT_MODE_ONESHOT:
>                 __setup_APIC_LVTT(calibration_result,
>                                   mode != CLOCK_EVT_MODE_PERIODIC, 1);
>                 break;
> 
> that will affect high-res timers. Wont calibration_result have the same 
> value after your patch as well, but only a 16th of it will be used in 
> __setup_APIC_LVTT(), causing 16 times shorter timeouts than intended?
> 
> I.e. are we fixing a bug, are we changing nothing, or are we 
> introducing a bug? :-)

i think we are introducing a bug :)

	Ingo
--
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/