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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 20:56:24 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tony.luck@...el.com, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...ux.intel.com, rientjes@...gle.com, imammedo@...hat.com, prarit@...hat.com, toshi.kani@...com, brice.goglin@...il.com, mingo@...nel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] x86, sched: allow topolgies where NUMA nodes share an LLC On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 08:22:19AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > FWIW, I don't consider the current situation broken. Nobody ever > promised the kernel that a NUMA node would never happen inside a socket, > or inside a cache boundary enumerated in CPUID. Right, I don't think the name matters. A synthetic flag which you set in .../cpu/intel.c for each SNC configuration and then check said flag in topology setup code is cleaner than having to add all those vendor/model checks ... -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists