linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] x86,cpu-hotplug: assign same CPU number to readded CPU

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: <54180899.4060408@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Sep 2014 17:53:29 +0800
From:	Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
To:	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
CC:	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, bp@...en8.de,
	gong.chen@...ux.intel.com, tony.luck@...el.com, x86@...nel.org,
	imammedo@...hat.com, huawei.libin@...wei.com,
	paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@...radead.org,
	Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...ux.intel.com>,
	Linn Crosetto <linn@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] x86,cpu-hotplug: assign same CPU number to readded
 CPU

Hi Mike,

于 14-9-16 上午11:56, Mike Galbraith 写道:
> On Mon, 2014-09-15 at 10:44 -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
>> On Mon, 2014-09-15 at 06:25 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 16:21 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>>>> There is no response for two months since posting v4.
>>>> What can I do for pushing the patch to upstream?
>>> Looks to me like we have two patches floating about for more or less the
>>> same problem, this one, and...
>>>
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/29/159
>>>
>>> ..this one, which you reviewed, and HP both reviewed and tested.
>>>
>>> We seem to kinda stuck with Boris having said don't diddle the
>>> cpu_llc_shared_map, but HP/Intel saying that this map diddling fixes
>>> their explosions.  If your alternative is preferred over diddling
>>> cpu_llc_shared_map, perhaps HP/Intel can test/confirm that their
>>> explosions stay gone?
>> Well, Boris mentioned later in his email:
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/22/201
>>
>> And I agree with his assessment that both patches make sense.
> Nonetheless, this just reeks of "department of redundancy department".
> I have nothing against doing both really, but it does leave me wondering
> if we would not then be merging the mask clearing "just because".

Maybe you miss my reply.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/29/40

Regards,
Wanpeng Li

>
> -Mike
>
> --
> 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/

--
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/