linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] x86, cpu, amd: Add a per-vendor BSP function

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]

Date:	Mon, 08 Aug 2011 15:56:08 -0500
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
CC:	X86-ML <x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] x86, cpu, amd: Add a per-vendor BSP function

On 08/08/2011 01:57 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> From: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>
> 
> Add a per-vendor function which runs everything that needs to run once
> on the BSP during boot. Concentrate AMD-specific functionality there.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>
>  
> +static void __init vendor_run_on_bsp(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> +{
> +	switch (c->x86_vendor) {
> +	case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
> +		amd_run_on_bsp(c);
> +		break;
> +
> +	default:
> +		break;
> +	}
> +}
> +

This is totally going backwards.  We *should* be using struct cpu_dev
rather than switch statements for this.

	-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/