linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH x86/mm UPDATED] x86-64, NUMA: Fix distance table handling

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: <20110302191338.GE28266@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Wed, 2 Mar 2011 20:13:38 +0100
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	tglx@...utronix.de, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH x86/mm UPDATED] x86-64, NUMA: Fix distance table
 handling

Hello,

On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:06:41AM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > Hmmm?  I can't really follow your sentence.  This is init stage.
> > Anyways, why can't it just walk over the enabled nodes?  What would be
> > the difference?
> 
> my point is that we really not need to go over it if original is not there.

Oh, you mean if (!phys_dist)?  Yeah yeah sure, I was mostly talking
about allocating new table separately and returning the count and all
those things.  Can you just do the phys_dist testing and going over
enabled nodes?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/