linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 7/7] Provide the interface to validate the proc

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:	Tue, 19 Jul 2016 14:53:20 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	cl@...ux.com, mika.j.penttila@...il.com, mingo@...hat.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rjw@...ysocki.net, hpa@...or.com,
	yasu.isimatu@...il.com, isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com,
	gongzhaogang@...pur.com, len.brown@...el.com, lenb@...nel.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, chen.tang@...ystack.cn, rafael@...nel.org,
	x86@...nel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 7/7] Provide the interface to validate the proc_id
 which they give

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 03:28:08PM +0800, Dou Liyang wrote:
> When we want to identify whether the proc_id is unreasonable or not, we
> can call the "acpi_processor_validate_proc_id" function. It will search
> in the duplicate IDs. If we find the proc_id in the IDs, we return true
> to the call function. Conversely, false represents available.
> 
> When we establish all possible cpuid <-> nodeid mapping, we will use the
> proc_id from ACPI table.
> 
> We do validation when we get the proc_id. If the result is true, we will
> stop the mapping.

The patch title probably should include "acpi:" header.  I can't tell
much about the specifics of the acpi changes but I think this is the
right approach for handling cpu hotplugs.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun