linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] vsmp: Fix number of CPUs when vsmp is disabled

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: <4FAA938A.1030003@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 09 May 2012 08:55:54 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC:	Ido Yariv <ido@...ery.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Shai Fultheim <shai@...lemp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] vsmp: Fix number of CPUs when vsmp is disabled

On 05/09/2012 08:44 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Ido Yariv <ido@...ery.com> wrote:
> 
>> +static void __init vsmp_cap_cpus(void)
>> +{
>> +	void __iomem *address;
>> +	unsigned int cfg, topology, node_shift, maxcpus;
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_VSMP
>> +	/* VSMP is enabled, no need to cap cpus */
>> +	return;
>> +#elif defined(CONFIG_SMP)
>> +	/*
>> +	 * CONFIG_X86_VSMP is not configured, so limit the number CPUs to the
> 
> I suspect this will throw compiler warnings in the 
> CONFIG_X86_VSMP && !CONFIG_SMP case.
> 

What on Earth is the point of allowing that combination?  Why not make
X86_VSMP depend on SMP and reduce the testing matrix?

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/