linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] - UV fix for size of hub mappings

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:	Sat, 27 Sep 2008 19:42:33 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>
Cc:	tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] - UV fix for size of hub mappings


* Jack Steiner <steiner@....com> wrote:

> Fix the size of the mappings of UV hub registers. Size must be a 
> function of the maximum node number within the SSI.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>

applied to tip/x86/uv, thanks Jack!

i'm wondering, the code still has a couple of ZZZ fixmes like:

 #ifdef ZZZ              /* Needs x2apic patch */
 static void uv_send_IPI_self(int vector)
 {
         apic_write(APIC_SELF_IPI, vector);
 }
 #endif

x2apic support is available in tip/master, so it would be nice to glue 
UV to generic x2apic support properly and remove duplication and fixmes.
For example, do we really need apic_x2apic_uv_x, or could we use 
apic_x2apic_cluster?

	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/