linux-kernel - Re: [patch 3/3] x86: io-apic - code style cleaning for setup_IO_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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20080906194413.GD23729@lenovo>
Date:	Sat, 6 Sep 2008 23:44:13 +0400
From:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, hpa@...or.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [patch 3/3] x86: io-apic - code style cleaning for
	setup_IO_APIC_irqs

[Cyrill Gorcunov - Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 11:38:20PM +0400]
| [Yinghai Lu - Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 12:16:28PM -0700]
| | On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 12:04 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:
| | > [Maciej W. Rozycki - Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 07:45:08PM +0100]
| | > | On Sat, 6 Sep 2008, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| | > |
| | > | > Ingo, how about the following approach? We don't introduce new
| | > | > functions but rather srink the code by new printout form.
| | > |
| | > |  Honestly, this one should probably use sprintf() or suchlike to avoid the
| | > | mess of printk() calls building a line of output from pieces.  It's quite
| | > | easy to calculate here what the maximum size of the buffer required could
| | > | be and automatic arrays can have variable size, so no need for the hassle
| | > | of heap management.  Calls to printk() without a trailing newline should
| | > | be avoided where possible as it messes up logging priority if a message
| | > | pops up from an interrupt inbetween.
| | > |
| | > |   Maciej
| | > |
| | >
| | > The easiest way would be just print this info on separate
| | > lines like
| | >
| | >        IO-APIC (apicid-pin) 1-1 not connected
| | >
| | > and just drop all this troubles :)
| | >
| | > I'm not sure how much memory we need for every io-apic
| | > pins - iirc there only 32 redirection entry so it could
| | > be about 32 bytes from stack would be enough. Will take
| | > a look. Thanks Maciej! Ingo?
| | 
| | no. some system could have 3 or 4 ioapic controller, and every one
| | have 24...(like three mcp55/io55)
| | 4*24
| | 
| | or old system have 1 8111 and 7 8132. will have 32 + 7*2*7
| | 
| | YH
| |
| 
| Didn't really understand all numbers :)
| We have
| 	24	io-apic route entries
| 	128	io-apic maximum in quantity
| 
| so the worst (hardly possible if ever) is when on last io-apic
| all pins are wrong. So for this case we would need
| 
| 	(3 + 1) * ((10 + 1) + (13 + 1)) = 100
| 
| where
| 	3 - strlen("127") - max io-apic number
| 	10 - Sum(strlen(0)+...+strlen(9)) - pin numbers
| 	13 - same sum for two-digit numbers
| 	+1 number - either "-" sign or " "
| 
| 100 bytes to print not connected pins. Ugh :-)
| 
| 		- Cyrill -

But if one day hardware changed - we'll be in troubles :)
So I think better would be just use Ingo's suggestion
about to separate apic/pin iterator and function body.

		- Cyrill -
--
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/