linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/14] [VOYAGER] x86: add {safe,hard}_smp_processor_id to smp

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: <49E4BB61.1090008@goop.org>
Date:	Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:35:45 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
CC:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/14] [VOYAGER] x86: add {safe,hard}_smp_processor_id
 to smp_ops

James Bottomley wrote:
> Not having apics, Voyager can't use the default apic implementation of
> these, it has to read from a special port in the VIC to get the
> processor ID, so abstract these functions in smp_ops to allow voyager
> to live simultaneously with the apic code.
>   

I thnk we should just drop safe_smp_processor_id().  It doesn't seem to 
do anything useful.

> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/smp.c b/arch/x86/xen/smp.c
> index 429834e..eb795bf 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/smp.c
> @@ -454,6 +454,11 @@ static irqreturn_t xen_call_function_single_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
>  	return IRQ_HANDLED;
>  }
>  
> +static int xen_hard_smp_processor_id(void)
> +{
> +	return read_apic_id();
> +}
>   

This should just be "return smp_processor_id()".  There are no 
meaningful APICs under Xen.

    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/