linux-kernel - [PATCH] x86, cpuinfo remove cpu_data x86_model

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1431986509-25448-1-git-send-email-prarit@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 18 May 2015 18:01:49 -0400
From:	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: [PATCH] x86, cpuinfo remove cpu_data x86_model_id trailing whitespace

When comparing 'model name' fields in /proc/cpuinfo it was noticed that
a simple test comparing the model name fields was failing.  After some
simple investigation it was noticed that, in fact, the model name fields
are different for each processor.  Processor 0's model name field had
white space removed, while the other processors did not.

Another way of seeing this behaviour is to convert spaces into underscores
in the output of /proc/cpuinfo,

[thetango@...rit ~]# grep "^model name" /proc/cpuinfo | uniq -c | sed 's/\ /_/g'
______1_model_name      :_AMD_Opteron(TM)_Processor_6272
_____63_model_name      :_AMD_Opteron(TM)_Processor_6272_________________

which shows two different model name fields even though they should be the
same.

This occurs because the kernel calls strim() on cpu 0's x86_model_id field
to output a pretty message to the console in print_cpu_info(), and as a
result truncates the whitespace at the end of the x86_model_id field.

The x86_model_id field should be the same for the same processors.  This
patch removes traliing space on every processor's x86_model_id field to make
them consistent and maintains the correct output for print_cpu_info():

smpboot: CPU0: AMD Opteron(TM) Processor 6272 (fam: 15, model: 01, stepping: 02)

The x86_model_id field is correct and has no whitespace across all processors:

[thetango@...rit ~]# grep "^model name" /proc/cpuinfo | uniq -c | sed 's/\ /_/g'
_____64_model_name      :_AMD_Opteron(TM)_Processor_6272

Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c |    3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
index a62cf04..fa771bb 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
@@ -443,6 +443,7 @@ static void get_model_name(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 		while (q <= &c->x86_model_id[48])
 			*q++ = '\0';	/* Zero-pad the rest */
 	}
+	strim(c->x86_model_id);
 }
 
 void cpu_detect_cache_sizes(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
@@ -1122,7 +1123,7 @@ void print_cpu_info(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 		printk(KERN_CONT "%s ", vendor);
 
 	if (c->x86_model_id[0])
-		printk(KERN_CONT "%s", strim(c->x86_model_id));
+		printk(KERN_CONT "%s", c->x86_model_id);
 	else
 		printk(KERN_CONT "%d86", c->x86);
 
-- 
1.7.9.3

--
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/