linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/6] INIT: Limit the number of per cpu calibration bootup messages

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20091117175947.GE5476@lenovo>
Date:	Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:59:47 +0300
From:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To:	Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	tglx@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, rdreier@...co.com, rdunlap@...otime.net,
	tj@...nel.org, andi@...stfloor.org, gregkh@...e.de,
	yhlu.kernel@...il.com, rientjes@...gle.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com,
	steiner@....com, fweisbec@...il.com, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] INIT: Limit the number of per cpu calibration
	bootup messages

On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 09:49:54AM -0800, Mike Travis wrote:
...
>>> And if we do need it generically, it's available there as
>>> hard_smp_processor_id() when start_kernel() is called.  So init/main.c
>>> could remember that value in an __initdata annotated static variable.
>>>
>>> But just using a boolean for this "did I print the bogomips message
>>> already?" thing seems more than sufficient.
>>>
>>
>> Yes. As I see Mike already pick it up. Thanks David!
>>
>> 	-- Cyrill
>
> I'd like to say that, but Peter wanted it to become an inlined function
> return value, and there are too many references in too many arches to
> a scalar value, so that moves it out of the scope of this patch set.

I meant only "local static variable being used for printing to suppress recursion"
idea rather then boot_cpu_id() inliner at moment [btw there was some thread
someday about printk_once (or something like that) though I'm not sure if patches
were merged] :) As only the inliner will be ready we will just switch to use it
eliminating this static variable. That is how I imagine it.

> Thanks,
> Mike
>
	-- Cyrill
--
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/