linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] x86/fixup_irq: Clean the offlining CPU from the irq affinity mask

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: <27240C0AC20F114CBF8149A2696CBE4A18A27F@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 26 Sep 2012 08:10:04 +0000
From:	"Liu, Chuansheng" <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>
To:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86/fixup_irq: Clean the offlining CPU from the irq
 affinity mask

> Btw, on a slightly different note, I'm also rather surprised that the above
> code doesn't care about the return value of chip->irq_set_affinity() ..
> Shouldn't we warn if that fails?

It seems another case when irq_set_affinity is NULL whenever affinity is changed or not before that,
For this case, I suppose the chip is not supporting set_affinity, then the chip should set all
related irqs into just CPU0, otherwise, it will bring some trouble, do you agree?

I guess this case should be covered outside fixup_irqs() code.