linux-kernel - blk_mq_update_queue_map makes an (invalid?) assumption about cpu ordering

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:52:50 -0400
From:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To:	jaxboe@...ionio.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: blk_mq_update_queue_map makes an (invalid?) assumption about cpu ordering

Hi, Jens,

blk_mq_update_queue_map does this:

        for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
                if (!cpu_online(i)) {
                        map[i] = 0;
                        continue;
                }

...
                first_sibling = get_first_sibling(i);
                if (first_sibling == i) {
                        map[i] = cpu_to_queue_index(nr_uniq_cpus, nr_queues,
                                                        queue);
                        queue++;
                } else
                        map[i] = map[first_sibling];

This assumes that the first_sibling is listed before any other siblings,
which I don't believe is true.  I don't think you get any guaranteed
ordering in that cpu_possible_mask.

... or did I miss something?

Cheers,
Jeff
--
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/