linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/sfi: fix ioapic gsi range

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: <4C0EB168.5080801@zytor.com>
Date:	Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:08:56 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC:	jacob pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/sfi: fix ioapic gsi range

On 06/08/2010 01:59 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> 
> No.  There is no reason to loose 16 IDT entries indefinitely.  We may
> need a boot time allocation when we see we have isa irqs, to replace
> the static allocation that we have.  But for the most part we dynamically
> idt entries aka vector numbers today, and there is no reason we can't
> generalize that in the future.
> 

Well, that boot time allocation is one of the things
legacy_pic->nr_legacy_irq is used for, and it really makes sense, I
think.  I would really like to move away from a compile-time allocation,
and I still find it hard to believe it has a reason to exist.

	-hpa

--
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/