linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86_32: summit_32, use BAD

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: <20090228082120.GA11425@elte.hu>
Date:	Sat, 28 Feb 2009 09:21:20 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
Cc:	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86_32: summit_32, use BAD_APICID


* Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com> wrote:

> On 25.2.2009 12:10, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * Jiri Slaby<jirislaby@...il.com>  wrote:
>>> In that case, the callers code is buggy, since it passes
>>> online_cpu masks even on machines, where apics are not on the
>>> same clusters.
>>
>> It's most likely confusion in the old code. This used to be
>> copy&paste-ed versions of different snapshots of the
>> mach-default-code, hacked to make work on weird platforms.
>> Mainline fixes/updates werent merged in consistently.
>>
>> So could you please send a patch that fixes this?
>
> I've sent 4 more patches, but there are still issues:
> * es7000 + summit: I haven't solved calling with all bits set (only all  
> online is sufficient to trigger this). Some of the processors needn't be  
> on the same apic cluster. It will scream now (again -- it did before  
> adding the "optimisation"). Actually I don't know how to solve this. How  
> the caller would know the correct mask, ANDing with a apic->target_cpus  
> retval?
>
> * es7000: target_cpus_cluster returns CPU_MASK_ALL and hence it will  
> choke itself, because es7000_cpu_mask_to_apicid doesn't count with that.  
> Invoked by setup_timer_IRQ0_pin this way.
>
> * set_desc_affinity doesn't expect apic->cpu_mask_to_apicid_and to  
> return BAD_APICID and silently sets desc->affinity. Again, I see no  
> straightforward solution (rollback of assign_irq_vector and  
> set_extra_move_desc needed).

Ok, they look good. I got a conflict in 2/4, due to an 
interacting cleanup from Yinghai - mind resending them against 
latest tip:master?

Thanks,

	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/