linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: Put the num_processors++ code in a more suitable position

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.2.10.1609061423200.40833@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:   Tue, 6 Sep 2016 14:23:49 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:     Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Put the num_processors++ code in a more suitable
 position

On Tue, 6 Sep 2016, Dou Liyang wrote:

> This is a code optimization.
> 

Not sure that it's optimization, it's just for correctness.

> If checking the topology package map of apicid and cpu is failure,
> it will stop generating the processor info for that apicid and the
> disabled_cpus will plus one. However, the num-processors has already
> been added one above. That may cause the number of processors incorrect.
> 
> Just put the num_processors++ code in the more suitable position.
> it makes sure that the num-processors will not conflict with the
> disabled_cpus.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@...fujitsu.com>

Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>