linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] x86, sched: allow topolgies where NUMA nodes share an LLC

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]

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.