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: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1604061557480.12514@hypnos>
Date:	Wed, 6 Apr 2016 16:08:50 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
To:	David Vrabel <dvrabel@...tab.net>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>, rt@...utronix.de,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PREEMPT-RT] [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Add comment for missing
 FROZEN notifier transitions

On Wed, 6 Apr 2016, David Vrabel wrote:

> On 04/04/16 13:32, Anna-Maria Gleixner wrote:
> > Xen guests do not offline/online CPUs during suspend/resume and
> > therefore FROZEN notifier transitions are not required. Add this
> > explanation as a comment in the code to get not confused why
> > CPU_TASKS_FROZEN masked transitions are not considered.
> > 
> > Cc: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
> > Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
> > Cc: xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org 
> > Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c         |    6 ++++++
> >  arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c         |    7 +++++++
> >  drivers/xen/events/events_fifo.c |    6 ++++++
> >  3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
> > 
> > --- a/arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c
> > @@ -213,6 +213,12 @@ static int xen_cpu_notification(struct n
> >  				unsigned long action,
> >  				void *hcpu)
> >  {
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Xen guests do not offline/online CPUs during
> > +	 * suspend/resume, thus CPU_TASKS_FROZEN masked transitions
> > +	 * are not considered.
> > +	 */
> 
> This may not be true for arm guests.

Ok. Should the frozen transitions be handled the same way than the
corresponding non frozen transitions? If yes and if it doesn't matter
to mask action with ~CPU_TASKS_FROZEN in arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c and
drivers/xen/events/events_fifo.c like Juergen sugessts, I could change
the patch by masking action.

Anna-Maria

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ