linux-kernel - Re: [Patch v3 2/2] x86/acpi: Remove the repeated lapic address override entry parsing

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:	Thu, 11 Aug 2016 10:37:43 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc:	rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 2/2] x86/acpi: Remove the repeated lapic address
 override entry parsing


* Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com> wrote:

> On 08/10/16 at 04:02pm, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > ACPI MADT has a 32-bit field providing lapic address at which
> > > each processor can access its lapic information. MADT also contains
> > > an optional entry to provide a 64-bit address to override the 32-bit
> > > one. However the current code does the lapic address override entry
> > > parsing twice. One is in early_acpi_boot_init() because AMD NUMA need
> > > get boot_cpu_id earlier. The other is in acpi_boot_init() which parses
> > > all MADT entries.
> > > 
> > > So in this patch remove the repeated code in the 2nd part. Meanwhile
> > > print lapic override entry information like other MADT entry, this
> > > will be added to boot log.
> > 
> > it is not at all clear to me from this changelog whether the change is supposed to 
> > change anything. If not then please spell it out explicitly:
> > 
> >   "This patch is not supposed to change any behavior."
> 
> I don't know if adding new information to boot log can be seen as
> behavior change. If lapic override entry exist, the code change will
> add one line of message to boot log:
> 
> 	LAPIC_ADDR_OVR (address[0xXXXXXXXX])
> 
> If this is not behavior change, I will add the sentence you suggested.

Yeah, you can write it:

	"This patch is not supposed to change any runtime behavior, other than 
	 improving kernel messages."

Thanks,

	Ingo