linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: speed cpu_up by quirking cpu_init

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:	Fri, 8 May 2015 14:15:42 -0400
From:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: speed cpu_up by quirking cpu_init_udelay

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:

>> +     pr_debug("cpu_init_udelay quirk to %d, was %d", new_udelay, init_udelay);
>
> Can we make this printk(KERN_DEBUG please?
>
> I'd like to be able to slap "debug" on the command line and not
> recompile the kernel. And no, dyndbg="file smpboot.c +p" or whatever the
> syntax is, simply doesn't scale if I want to see all debug messages from
> early boot.

I agree with you.  Further, you made me think about it, and while it was helpful
when I wrote the patch, I don't think any printk() is needed upstream.

see v3 just sent.

Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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/