linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 0/8] Online/offline BSP on x86

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: <1317847067.6766.46.camel@twins>
Date:	Wed, 05 Oct 2011 22:37:47 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"Mallick, Asit K" <asit.k.mallick@...el.com>,
	"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/8] Online/offline BSP on x86

On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 13:29 -0700, Yu, Fenghua wrote:
> > Yes, I got that part. Why do you care?
> 
> I can think of two reasons for bsp offline/online:
> 
> 1. RAS needs the feature. If socket0 needs to be hotplugged for any
> reason (any thread on socket0 is bad, shared cache issue, uncore
> issue, etc), CPU0 is required to be offlined.
> 
Right, this is what I asked.

> 2. CPU0 is symmetrical to other CPU's. There is no specific reason why
> it shouldn't be offlined except BIOS requirements. 

Right, so how are you going to deal with crappy BIOS stuffs? We all know
there's plenty of that around.
--
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/