linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] X86, UV: Update UV APIC driver check

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: <20150324063231.GA26302@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 Mar 2015 07:32:31 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Hedi Berriche <hedi@....com>,
	Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] X86, UV: Update UV APIC driver check


* Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:

> Fix a bug in the oem check function that determines if the system
> is a UV system and the BIOS is compatible with the kernel's UV apic
> driver.  This prevents some possibly obscure panics and guards the
> system against being started on SGI hardware that does not have the
> required kernel support. [...]

This would be one patch ...

> [...]  Also add update for new UV3000 system.

... and that's a second patch.

> The first "OEM" check was also optimized to return faster if the
> system is not an SGI or UV system.

Looks like this mixes up with the fix and can be part of the first 
patch - although ideally it would have been good to create a 3 patch 
series to preserve the separation of the various changes.

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/