linux-kernel - Re: disabled APICs being counted as processors ?

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]

Date:	Sun, 26 Jan 2014 10:09:26 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: disabled APICs being counted as processors ?


* Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:36 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > No, this message is printed in prefill_possible_map() which
> > _generates_ cpu_possible_map, so '8' is the number of bits in
> > cpu_possible_map.
> >
> > So the problem is that the counting of disabled but hotpluggable CPUs
> > is over-eager. Since I haven't actually seen _true_ hotplug CPU
> > hardware yet, I'd argue we do the change below - allocating space for
> > never-present CPUs is stupid. If there's true hot-plug CPUs around
> > that could come online after we've booted, then we want to know about
> > them explicitly.
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> > index a32da80..75a351a 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> > @@ -1223,10 +1223,7 @@ __init void prefill_possible_map(void)
> >         i = setup_max_cpus ?: 1;
> >         if (setup_possible_cpus == -1) {
> >                 possible = num_processors;
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> > -               if (setup_max_cpus)
> > -                       possible += disabled_cpus;
> > -#else
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> >                 if (possible > i)
> >                         possible = i;
> >  #endif
> 
> Agreed.

A question would be kexec and virtualization: do any of those variants 
boot a kernel with 'disabled but working' CPUs, which could be 
hot-onlined later on?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/