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  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, 21 Aug 2018 00:48:26 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
Cc:     Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@....com>,
        "palmer@...ive.com" <palmer@...ive.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/5] RISC-V: Add cpu_operatios structure

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 11:51:03AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> Having thought about this more, I think cpu_ops should be an pointer array
> of NR_CPUS size. This means its not necessary to have have same ops for
> all CPUs. The ARM64 implementation of CPU operations also allows separate
> CPU operations for each CPU.
> 
> For example, let's us assume that we have an SOC where we 2 cores
> per-cluster and N clusters. All CPUs of cluster0 comes up at the same time
> whereas cluster1 onwards we have to bring-up CPUs using special HW
> mechanism.

All this (including the patch itself) seems a little hypothetical.
I'd rather only add all this infrastructure once it actually is needed.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists