linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH resend] x86/platform: Remove incorrect error message in x86_default_fixup_cpu

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, 16 Apr 2012 19:31:46 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	<mingo@...hat.com>, <hpa@...or.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <sp@...ascale.com>, <bp@...64.org>,
	<tglx@...utronix.de>, <daniel@...ascale-asia.com>,
	Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] x86/platform: Remove incorrect error message in
 x86_default_fixup_cpu_id()

On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 02:38:09PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 06:06:48PM +0200, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
> > 
> > It's only called from amd.c:srat_detect_node(). The introduced
> > condition for calling the fixup code is true for all AMD multi-node
> > processors, e.g. Magny-Cours and Interlagos. There we have 2 NUMA
> > nodes on one socket. Thus there are cores having different
> > numa-node-id but with equal phys_proc_id.
> > 
> > There is no point to print error messages in such a situation.
> > 
> > The confusing/misleading error message was introduced with commit
> > 64be4c1c2428e148de6081af235e2418e6a66dda (x86: Add x86_init platform
> > override to fix up NUMA core numbering).
> > 
> > Remove the default fixup function (especially the error message) and
> > replace it by a NULL pointer check, move the Numascale-specific
> > condition for calling the fixup into the fixup-function itself and
> > slightly adapt the comment.
> > 
> > Cc: <stable@...nel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/include/asm/x86_init.h      |    1 -
> >  arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_numachip.c |    7 +++++--
> >  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c            |    7 ++++---
> >  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c         |    9 ---------
> >  arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c           |    1 -
> >  5 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > 
> > This patch didn't make it into v3.3.
> > But the misleading error message introduced with numachip support was
> > merged.
> 
> Yes, please apply this one, I still get the following on my box with
> 3.4-rc1+:
> 
> [    0.382396] Booting Node   0, Processors  #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 Ok.
> [    0.454471] Booting Node   1, Processors  #6
> [    0.469600] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0
> [    0.478361]  #7
> [    0.490949] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0
> [    0.499695]  #8
> [    0.512577] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0
> [    0.521331]  #9
> [    0.533921] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0
> [    0.542679]  #10
> [    0.555340] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0
> [    0.564088]  #11
> [    0.576730] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0

Still happens on -rc3. Ingo, can we please merge the above fix before 3.4
is out?

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551

--
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/