linux-kernel - Re: latest -git: WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/ipi.c:123 send_IPI_mask

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: <48AFB14F.7090407@goop.org>
Date:	Fri, 22 Aug 2008 23:42:23 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...nel.org>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: latest -git: WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/ipi.c:123	send_IPI_mask_bitmask+0xc3/0xe0()

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Well, smp_call_function_single already does all necessary locking; it
> makes more sense for it to check that what it's about to call still
> exists while inside the lock, instead of requiring the higher layers
> to guarantee that cannot happen on it.  This is simply a matter of the
> cost of checking at this point being quite low. 

It does, already doesn't it?  Hm, smp_call_function_mask() ands the
provided mask with the online mask, but it doesn't look like
smp_call_function_single() does the equivalent.

    J
--
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/