linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2][TRIVIAL] x86/smpboot: fix cpu bootup message

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAE9FiQXwtZEFx-6V_X20CGymtmtbRKqP7ECR9=DDKYyMSeZyBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 Dec 2013 10:30:43 -0800
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Cc:	Xie XiuQi <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Li Bin <huawei.libin@...wei.com>, x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2][TRIVIAL] x86/smpboot: fix cpu bootup message

On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 2:35 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 09:09:02AM +0800, Xie XiuQi wrote:
>> On 2013/12/23 21:34, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> > On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 04:33:00PM +0800, Xie XiuQi wrote:
>> >> When CPU0 and CPU1 aren't in same package, we got message
>> >> like this:
>> >>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
>> >> index 85dc05a..9e82c1e 100644
>> >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
>> >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
>> >> @@ -639,7 +639,7 @@ static void announce_cpu(int cpu, int apicid)
>> >>  {
>> >>    static int current_node = -1;
>> >>    int node = early_cpu_to_node(cpu);
>> >> -  static int width, node_width;
>> >> +  static int width, node_width, padding;
>> >>
>> >>    if (!width)
>> >>            width = num_digits(num_possible_cpus()) + 1; /* + '#' sign */
>> >> @@ -658,11 +658,13 @@ static void announce_cpu(int cpu, int apicid)
>> >>
>> >>                    printk(KERN_INFO ".... node %*s#%d, CPUs:  ",
>> >>                           node_width - num_digits(node), " ", node);
>> >> -          }
>> >>
>> >> -          /* Add padding for the BSP */
>> >> -          if (cpu == 1)
>> >> -                  pr_cont("%*s", width + 1, " ");
>> >> +                  /* Add padding for the BSP */
>> >> +                  if (!padding && (early_cpu_to_node(0) == current_node)) {
>> >
>> > You don't need "padding".
>> >
>>
>> On another machine, the configuration is:
>>
>> xiexiuqi@...alhost:~> lscpu
>> [...]
>> NUMA node0 CPU(s):     4-7,12-15
>> NUMA node1 CPU(s):     0-3,8-11
>>
>> Without "padding", we'll get message like this:
>>
>> [    0.349339] x86: Booting SMP configuration:
>> [    0.353504] .... node  #1, CPUs:        #1  #2  #3
>> [    0.398812] .... node  #0, CPUs:    #4  #5  #6  #7
>> [    0.535186] .... node  #1, CPUs:        #8  #9 #10 #11
>> [    0.594312] .... node  #0, CPUs:   #12 #13 #14 #15
>> [    0.652398] x86: Booted up 2 nodes, 16 CPUs
>
> Geez, is that box generating the cores to nodes groups at random during
> each boot?!
>
> Gotta admire bios dudes' "inventiveness".
>
> Ok, so Ingo, I guess we can take this -v2 version for now - I need to
> think of a way on how to address all that nonsense properly.
>
> Acked-by: Borislav "luvz BIOS people" Petkov <bp@...e.de>

No, should just take out lines of padding for BSP.

Yinghai
--
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/