linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] x86/apic changes for v2.6.38

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: <AANLkTi=fTkpH2i2qZEPXKJpiQRC=o15zbR7W5PRNku8G@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 6 Jan 2011 17:48:34 -0800
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/apic changes for v2.6.38

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 16:17:10 -0800 Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Linus Torvalds
>> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@...el.com> wrote:
>> >> Untested on X86.  Builds and boots on ia64 (both normally and with
>> >> maxcpus=8 to limit the number of cpus).
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
>> >
>> > Looks much better to me, and gets rid of that silly #ifdef that I reacted to.
>> >
>> > But no hurry, this looks low-priority. So let's make this go through
>> > the x86 tree and get merged later, after it has passed whatever normal
>> > tests that the -tip tree goes through. Ok?
>>
>> yes. x86 is safe. We have apicid_to_node[] array, and already check
>> apic id with MAX_LOCAL_APIC
>> in x86 version acpi_numa_processor_affinity_init().
>>
>> looks ia64 is using struct array with cpu idx for mapping
>>
>>         node_cpuid[srat_num_cpus].phys_id =
>>             (pa->apic_id << 8) | (pa->local_sapic_eid);
>>         /* nid should be overridden as logical node id later */
>>         node_cpuid[srat_num_cpus].nid = pxm;
>>         cpu_set(srat_num_cpus, early_cpu_possible_map);
>>         srat_num_cpus++;
>>
>> but it does not check the boundary of that array...
>>
>> struct node_cpuid_s node_cpuid[NR_CPUS]..
>>
>> so if some one try to boot kernel with small NR_CPUS on bigger IA64
>> system, could get some variables node_cpuid[]...
>>
>> Assume Tony will have another patch for IA64 to check that before
>> apply this patch.
>>
>> sth like
>>
>> Index: linux-2.6/arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c
>> +++ linux-2.6/arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c
>> @@ -477,6 +479,11 @@ acpi_numa_processor_affinity_init(struct
>>       if (!(pa->flags & ACPI_SRAT_CPU_ENABLED))
>>               return;
>>
>> +     if (srat_num_cpus >= NR_CPUS) {
>> +             printk(KERN_WARNING "NR_CPUS (%d) is too small, not all cpus used.
>> %d\n", NR_CPUS);
>
>                                                                        CPUs used.
>
> Don't need %d 2 times.
>
right.
--
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/