linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] x86: UV uv

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: <20110521103847.GA26447@elte.hu>
Date:	Sat, 21 May 2011 12:38:47 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Cliff Wickman <cpw@....com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] x86: UV uv_tlb.c cleanup

* Cliff Wickman <cpw@....com> wrote:

> One logic difference:
> Breaking uv_init_per_cpu() into get_cpu_topology() and summarize_uvhub_sockets()
> actually corrects a possible bug for the theoretical case in which there is a
> missing socket on a blade. An 'smaster' (socket master) had been expected for
> every socket.

Please, as i asked in the previous mail, do not add logic changes to the 
cleanup patch! Please keep it in a separate patch, after the big cleanup patch.

It will be very hard to debug if you find a regression in that cleanup patch: 
since it also changes logic you do not know whether it's due to changed logic 
or one of the cleanups having an unintended side-effect ...

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/