| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <52BEF53E.4000704@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2013 10:58:54 -0500 From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>, Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>, Yang Zhang <yang.z.zhang@...el.com>, Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>, Janet Morgan <janet.morgan@...el.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, Ruiv Wang <ruiv.wang@...il.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, irq, fix logical AND/OR error in check_irq_vectors_for_cpu_disable() On 12/27/2013 08:07 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 12/27/2013 08:13 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote: >>> >>> Back to my question, assume cpu1 will be off-lined and one irq affinity is >>> set as (1, 2) -- this irq will be bypassed. Looks good. But if one irq >>> affinity is set as only (1), -- this irq is bypassed, too. Not right! >> >> Oh, yes, this is a bug. ... and as you point out ... >> > > Does this mean the patch that is currently in my tree should not be > pushed to Linus? It sounds like that to me... Yes, hpa -- please drop the patch. I will resubmit an updated patch after testing. P. > > -hpa > -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists