linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86, ACPI: Fix the wrong assignment when Handle apic/x2apic entries

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: <20160810130333.GA5598@x1.redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 10 Aug 2016 21:03:33 +0800
From:	Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86, ACPI: Fix the wrong assignment when Handle
 apic/x2apic entries

On 08/10/16 at 02:53pm, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > It won't impact the result, we still should fix the code bug.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
> > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
> > Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
> > Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> > Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
> > Cc: x86@...nel.org
> > Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > index 90d84c3..2b25d3f 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > @@ -1031,8 +1031,8 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_madt_lapic_entries(void)
> >  			return ret;
> >  		}
> >  
> > -		x2count = madt_proc[0].count;
> > -		count = madt_proc[1].count;
> > +		count = madt_proc[0].count;
> > +		x2count = madt_proc[1].count;
> >  	}
> >  	if (!count && !x2count) {
          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I mean here the value checking won't be impacted by the wrong
assignment.

> >  		printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "No LAPIC entries present\n");
> 
> Why does this bug have no effect?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	Ingo