linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: Cleanup boot CPUs table

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: <20130928102305.GA5956@pd.tnic>
Date:	Sat, 28 Sep 2013 12:23:05 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	huawei.libin@...wei.com, wangyijing@...wei.com,
	fenghua.yu@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de, guohanjun@...wei.com,
	paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: Cleanup boot CPUs table

On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 10:25:42AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Could we, with another add-on patch, further compress the first half
> of the output as well?
>
> Advanced output like this would be really cool:

Sure.

> > [    0.074509] x86: Booting node #0, CPUs:       #1  #2  #3  #4  #5  #6  #7
> > [    0.644008] x86: Booting node #1, CPUs:   #8  #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15
> > [    1.245006] x86: Booting node #2, CPUs:  #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23
> > [    1.864005] x86: Booting node #3, CPUs:  #24 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31
> > [    2.489005] x86: Booting node #4, CPUs:  #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39
> > [    3.093005] x86: Booting node #5, CPUs:  #40 #41 #42 #43 #44 #45 #46 #47
> > [    3.698005] x86: Booting node #6, CPUs:  #48 #49 #50 #51 #52 #53 #54 #55
> > [    4.304005] x86: Booting node #7, CPUs:  #56 #57 #58 #59 #60 #61 #62 #63
> > [    4.961413] x86: Booted up 8 nodes, 64 CPUs

Boot(ing|ed) kinda wastes unnecessary space too, how about we go a step
further:

[    0.074509] x86: Booting SMP configuration:
[    0.644008] .... node #0, CPUs:       #1  #2  #3  #4  #5  #6  #7
[    1.245006] .... node #1, CPUs:   #8  #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15
[    1.864005] .... node #2, CPUs:  #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23
[    2.489005] .... node #3, CPUs:  #24 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31
[    3.093005] .... node #4, CPUs:  #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39
[    3.698005] .... node #5, CPUs:  #40 #41 #42 #43 #44 #45 #46 #47
[    4.304005] .... node #6, CPUs:  #48 #49 #50 #51 #52 #53 #54 #55
[    4.961413] .... node #7, CPUs:  #56 #57 #58 #59 #60 #61 #62 #63
[    5.245021] x86: Booted up 8 nodes, 64 CPUs

> > [    0.072367] x86: Booting node #0, CPUs:     #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 
> > [    0.686329] x86: Booted up 1 node, 8 CPUs

vs

[    0.074509] x86: Booting SMP configuration:
[    0.072367] .... node #0, CPUs:     #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7
[    0.686329] x86: Booted up 1 node, 8 CPUs

Btw, the "x86" prefix would mean we want to either change pr_fmt() of
arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c (which I rather not) or not use pr_info (which
I'd prefer).

> Note the typographical details I added:
> 
>   - I added an extra space after 'CPUs:' to make the table stand out 
>     better from far away

Ok.

>   - Removed the 'OK' - it really does not add any more information than
>     the newline already does

Yes.

>   - Changed the 'Brought up' message to be more consistent with the prior
>     messages.

Ok.

>   - Added nodes count to the 'Booted up' line. Since we count nodes and
>     CPUs, we might as well want to demonstrate our superior counting
>     skills and print out both.

Haha, ok.

>   - The 'node' counting uses the new num_digits() function - this was very
>     easy to implement in my mockup ;-)

Ok.

>   - Note the singular spelling of 'node' in the 1-node case. Again this 
>     was easy in the mockup!

Should be easy to do :)

So how about the even shorter mockup above?

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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/