linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 10/18] x86/intel_rdt: Build structures for each resource based on cache topology

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.2.20.1610261930020.5013@nanos>
Date:   Wed, 26 Oct 2016 19:31:30 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
cc:     "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        "Anvin, H Peter" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Nilay Vaish <nilayvaish@...il.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@...com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        "Prakhya, Sai Praneeth" <sai.praneeth.prakhya@...el.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 10/18] x86/intel_rdt: Build structures for each resource
 based on cache topology

On Wed, 26 Oct 2016, Luck, Tony wrote:

> Order is visible to users when we print entries in the schemata file, and
> validate input that they write (we require that they provide all masks in
> the same order as this list).

> If we hot remove a socket, it disappears from the list, and from the
> schemata file. When we put in a replacement it reappears. I didn't want
> the user to see:
> L3:0=fffff;2=fffff;3=fffff;1=fffff
> after hot replace socket 1, hence the sort.

Fair enough. Spelling this out in a comment might prevent questions about
this in the future.
 
Thanks,

	tglx