linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Avoid mask based num_possible_cpus and num_online

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:	Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:30:07 -0500
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
To:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Avoid mask based num_possible_cpus and num_online_cpus
 -v3

> If I am not missing anything obvious, applying this patch can effectively
> convert the above code into an infinite loop, among other damages!
>
> I still feel it would be safer to edit set_cpu_possible() such that
> nr_possible_cpus is updated whenever cpu_possible_mask is altered.

Yup, I agree with you. The important thing is, even if we use set_cpu_possible(),
x86 performance doesn't drop. So, I don't understand why we need to take
current strategy.
--
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/