[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100506141358.GB20994@aftab>
Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 16:13:58 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>
To: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
CC: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"stable@...nel.org" <stable@...nel.org>,
"stable-review@...nel.org" <stable-review@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>, Jiri Benc <jbenc@...e.cz>,
"Herrmann3, Andreas" <Andreas.Herrmann3@....com>,
"Ostrovsky, Boris" <Boris.Ostrovsky@....com>
Subject: Re: [113/197] x86, cacheinfo: Calculate L3 indices
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Date: Thu, May 06, 2010 at 09:46:21AM -0400
> Well, we have
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_K8_NB
> static inline struct pci_dev *node_to_k8_nb_misc(int node)
> {
> return (node < num_k8_northbridges) ? k8_northbridges[node] : NULL;
> }
> #else
> static inline struct pci_dev *node_to_k8_nb_misc(int node)
> {
> return NULL;
> }
> #endif
>
> So it legitimately returns NULL in two cases:
>
> 1) if someone passes too large node
> 2) if CONFIG_K8_NB is unset
>
> 1) Either we assume that node will always be in the range (i.e.
> amd_get_nb_id() will never go crazy return anything bogus), and then we
> could just drop the test completely. Or we want to check for such the
> possibility, and then node_to_k8_nb_misc() is going to return NULL in such
> cases, and so we want to check for it.
No, we want to check it since K8_NB has many users - not only L3.
> 2) is now moot, as all three in-tree callers are now under proper ifdefs
> (CONFIG_CPU_SUP_AMD, which depends on CONFIG_K8_NB after your patch has
> been applied). So I believe we could remove it, right?
I don't think I understand "remove it" here. Which "it" you're referring to?
> Either way, current state seems inconsistent. So either we should add the
> return value check to amd_calc_l3_indices() as well, or remove all the
> NULL magic altogether, i.e. the (untested) patch below.
>
> What do you think?
Take a look at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-tip.git;a=commitdiff;h=f2b20e41407fccfcfacf927ff91ec888832a37af
This does
+ if (num_k8_northbridges == 0)
+ return;
in amd_check_l3_disable().
So if K8_NB has failed initializing for some reason, we never go near
the pci devs and the node_to_k8_nb_misc() calls since we effectively
disable the L3 functionality.
Thus the NULL pointer checks you remove in the patch below are
superfluous, I agree, and I have already removed those in my tree along
with the other improvements/fixes I'm working on right now.
>
>
> From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
> Subject: x86, cacheinfo: remove unnecessary NULL pointer checks
>
> As K8_NB thing is now always initialized on AMD CPUs, and we don't have
> any caller that would be outside CONFIG_CPU_SUP_AMD/CONFIG_K8_NB, it is
> safe to assume that kb_northbridges has been always initialized).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
>
> arch/x86/include/asm/k8.h | 10 +---------
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c | 6 ------
> 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/k8.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/k8.h
> index f70e600..0cff8ba 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/k8.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/k8.h
> @@ -15,17 +15,9 @@ extern int k8_get_nodes(struct bootnode *nodes);
> extern int k8_numa_init(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn);
> extern int k8_scan_nodes(void);
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_K8_NB
> static inline struct pci_dev *node_to_k8_nb_misc(int node)
> {
> - return (node < num_k8_northbridges) ? k8_northbridges[node] : NULL;
> + return k8_northbridges[node];
> }
> -#else
> -static inline struct pci_dev *node_to_k8_nb_misc(int node)
> -{
> - return NULL;
> -}
> -#endif
> -
>
> #endif /* _ASM_X86_K8_H */
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> index b3eeb66..6c5f3cd 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> @@ -355,9 +355,6 @@ static ssize_t show_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info *this_leaf, char *buf,
> if (!this_leaf->can_disable)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - if (!dev)
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> pci_read_config_dword(dev, 0x1BC + index * 4, ®);
> return sprintf(buf, "0x%08x\n", reg);
> }
> @@ -388,9 +385,6 @@ static ssize_t store_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info *this_leaf,
> if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> return -EPERM;
>
> - if (!dev)
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> if (strict_strtoul(buf, 10, &val) < 0)
> return -EINVAL;
>
>
> --
> Jiri Kosina
> SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
>
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
--
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating Systems Research Center
--
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