linux-kernel - Re: [RFC -tip] x86,apic: Do not use stacked physid_mask

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 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]

Date:	Tue, 10 Nov 2009 05:53:22 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC -tip] x86,apic: Do not use stacked physid_mask_t


* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> during the conversation about physid_mask_t passed
> via stack
> 
> 	http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/11/8/139
> 	http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/11/8/244
> 	http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/11/9/43
> 
> the idea of moving masks via pointers not just for
> x86-64 (we even don't use those masks there but still
> have function declarations in struct apic) but for x86-32
> as well (ie more naturally -- as we operate with "struct cpumask")
> found to be usefull.
> 
> As a result -- the following patch. Note that it's
> big enough and though I was trying to be carefull
> I would really appreciate more detailed review and
> comments and _complains_ as well.

No complaints from me - this is the cleanup i was striving for. Will let 
you know if i see any test failures.

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/