linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Typo in x86 apic.c with DIVISOR setup

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:	Fri, 10 Oct 2008 15:16:32 +0400
From:	"Cyrill Gorcunov" <gorcunov@...il.com>
To:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Typo in x86 apic.c with DIVISOR setup

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> Ah, it was CONFG who is guilty :) This is true indeed, thanks!
>
> yeah.
>
>> But here is not the same
>>
>>        apic_write(APIC_TDCR,
>>                (tmp_value & ~(APIC_TDR_DIV_1 | APIC_TDR_DIV_TMBASE)) |
>> -               APIC_TDR_DIV_16);
>> +               APIC_TDR_DIV);
>>
>> On x86_64 it will be 1 now but we've used 16 for a long time in
>> purpose to slowdown processor's bus CLKs from APIC point of view. So I
>> don't think it's good idea to change it now. If we start using divisor
>> 1 today -- it would work for some time 'till processor bus raised to
>> the some speed when we'll get counter underflow before calibration
>> finished.
>>
>> So could you please split the patch into two:
>> 1) Plain CONFG typo fix (which is completely Ack'ed)
>> 2) APIC divisor patch (which I'm not sure if we've to touch)
>
> okay, since we typoed that CONFG thing (sidenote: we really need a
> .config flag that will start a grep that fails the build if there's a
> non-existent CONFIG option anywhere in the tree), we basically tested
> the divisor of 16 on a wide range of boxes.
>
> So .. how about just standardizing on the divisor of 16 on both 32-bit
> and 64-bit?
>
>        Ingo
>

Btw I don't remember but hope it was not me who made this typo --
I've been trying to bring into kernel CONFIX variable one day (which
was typo too) :-)
--
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/