linux-kernel - Re: SRAT v1 support

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <86802c440905151138t42705477s95a972704db2ce9c@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 May 2009 11:38:52 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To:	xb <xavier.bru@...l.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Zoltan <zoltan.menyhart@...l.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: SRAT v1 support

On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 7:51 AM, xb <xavier.bru@...l.net> wrote:
> Recent linux kernels suppose that the  SRAT table is in rev 2 format (ACPI
> 3.0), but some BIOSes still provide SRAT table in rev 1.
> The rev 2 of the SRAT extension mainly provides an extension of the
> "proximity_domain" item from 8 bits to 32 bits, using a "reserved" field of
> the structure.
> When the "reserved" field is not null, linux finds a wrong proximity domain,
> and numa initialization is wrong.
> Following patch tests the SRAT revision to allow a correct initialization:
>
> This patch tests the version of SRAT ACPI table to allow supporting SRAT rev
> 1 and SRAT rev 2.
>
> diff -Nru linux-2.6.29-rc7-orig/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> linux-2.6.29-rc7-tmp/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> --- linux-2.6.29-rc7-orig/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c    2009-03-12
> 14:41:38.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.29-rc7-tmp/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c    2009-03-16
> 14:52:07.000000000 +0100
> @@ -260,7 +260,8 @@
> }
>
> static int __init
> -acpi_parse_lapic(struct acpi_subtable_header * header, const unsigned long
> end)
> +acpi_parse_lapic(const struct acpi_subtable_header * const header,
> +                const unsigned long end, const int rev)

do we need to pass that rev all over around?

looks like we could use one srat_version or pxm_mask variable to get
the same result.

YH
--
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/