linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] powernv:idle: Use correct IDLE_THREAD

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: <87bms0aapc.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Date:   Thu, 13 Apr 2017 20:00:47 +1000
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>,
        "Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        "Shreyas B. Prabhu" <shreyasbp@...il.com>,
        Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
        Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
        Akshay Adiga <akshay.adiga@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] powernv:idle: Use correct IDLE_THREAD_BITS in POWER8/9

Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org> writes:

> On Wed, 2017-04-12 at 17:16 +0530, Gautham R. Shenoy wrote:
>> From: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> 
>> This patch ensures that POWER8 and POWER9 processors use the correct
>> value of IDLE_THREAD_BITS as POWER8 has 8 threads per core and hence
>> the IDLE_THREAD_BITS should be 0xFF while POWER9 has only 4 threads
>> per core and hence the IDLE_THREAD_BITS should be 0xF.
>
> Why don't we derive this from the device tree rather than hard wiring it per cpu
> type?

Right.

In fact we already have threads_per_core which is exactly that.

cheers