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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170205164023.GA9281@lst.de>
Date:   Sun, 5 Feb 2017 17:40:23 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Joe Korty <joe.korty@...r.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] genirq: allow assigning affinity to present but
        not online CPUs

Hi Joe,

On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 08:58:09PM -0500, Joe Korty wrote:
> IIRC, some years ago I ran across a customer system where
> the #cpus_present was twice as big as #cpus_possible.
> 
> Hyperthreading was turned off in the BIOS so it was not
> entirely out of line for the extra cpus to be declared
> present, even though none of them would ever be available
> for use.

This sounds like a system we should quirk around instead of optimizing
for it.  Unless I totally misunderstand the idea behind cpu_possible
and cpu_present.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ