linux-kernel - Re: RFC: x86: cap iomem_resource to addressable physical memory

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: <20090621064201.GD1656@ucw.cz>
Date:	Sun, 21 Jun 2009 08:42:01 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	Martin Mares <mj@....cz>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: x86: cap iomem_resource to addressable physical memory

On Thu 2009-06-11 13:46:52, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > 
> > do we need do that on every cpu?
> > 
> > looks like we could do that in identify_boot_cpu.
> > 
> 
> What if the CPUs are heterogenous?  It's obviously a suboptimal
> situation, but it doesn't seem like something we can rely on.

Is it ok if that changes during runtime? What if someone hotplugs
heterogenous cpu? I'd say basing it on boot cpu seems simplest.
									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/