| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:11:20 -0700 From: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com> To: Alex Chiang <achiang@...com> Cc: "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "andi@...stfloor.org" <andi@...stfloor.org>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: add /proc/cpuinfo/physical id quirks On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 13:54 -0700, Alex Chiang wrote: > To me, the BIOS concerns are moot. I work closely with the BIOS > engineers for this platform; I have knowledge of future plans for > this BIOS and platform; and I know that they will not make any > changes that break the assumptions in my patch. > > If they do, we will catch it during platform testing, file a bug, > and not let them release their BIOS until it's fixed. Does that > satisfy you? :) > > So the algorithm for mapping an APIC ID to a physical/chassis ID > for this platform will not ever change. What happens if there is some genuine reason to do that because of some other platform workaround etc? > I am leaning towards sysfs, and prefer: > > /sys/devices/system/cpu/$cpu/chassis_id > Looks fine to me. thanks, suresh -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists