linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 22/25] x86/mcheck: Do the init in one place

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: <20161109170109.kpksvz2q6ltwtkud@pd.tnic>
Date:   Wed, 9 Nov 2016 18:01:09 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        rt@...utronix.de, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 22/25] x86/mcheck: Do the init in one place

On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 05:24:51PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> The behaviour was not changed - it was only reorganized to keep in one
> spot.

So there's the full CPU init path down cpu_up() -> ... -> identify_cpu()
where mcheck_cpu_init() is called and then there's also the hotplug
callbacks in mce_cpu_callback().

What you're proposing now is, merge the two.

But then the full path down identify_cpu() could still do
mheck_cpu_init() regardless where you move it.

IOW, I still don't see why this change is needed.

In more OW, why can't you simply do:

	err = cpuhp_setup_state(CPUHP_AP_X86_MCE_STARTING, "x86/mce:starting",
				mce_reenable_cpu, NULL);

and use the current notifier callback?

I still don't get the need for this churn.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.