linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next v1] x86/apic: Reduce print level of CPU limit announcement

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: <20190327101133.GQ22899@mtr-leonro.mtl.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Mar 2019 12:11:33 +0200
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        x86 <x86@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        linux-pm <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v1] x86/apic: Reduce print level of CPU limit
 announcement

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 11:53:37AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 02:49:02AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2019-03-27 at 11:38 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 02:17:40AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2019-03-27 at 11:09 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > > Kernel is booted with less possible CPUs (possible_cpus kernel boot
> > > > > option) than available CPUs will have prints like this:
> > > > []
> > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c
> > > > []
> > > > > @@ -2305,9 +2305,9 @@ int generic_processor_info(int apicid, int version)
> > > > >  	if (num_processors >= nr_cpu_ids) {
> > > > >  		int thiscpu = max + disabled_cpus;
> > > > >
> > > > > -		pr_warning("APIC: NR_CPUS/possible_cpus limit of %i "
> > > > > -			   "reached. Processor %d/0x%x ignored.\n",
> > > > > -			   max, thiscpu, apicid);
> > > > > +		pr_debug(
> > > > > +			"APIC: NR_CPUS/possible_cpus limit of %i reached. Processor %d/0x%x ignored.\n",
> > > > > +			max, thiscpu, apicid);
> > > >
> > > > 2 lines please
> > > >
> > > > 		pr_debug("APIC: etc...",
> > > > 			 max, thiscpu, ...);
> > >
> > > It was two lines before, but I changed for two reasons:
> > >  * It helped me to grep the source code to find the origin of dmesg warning.
> > >  * i got checkpatch warning about spitted string, can you please fix checkpatch do not complain?
> >
> > Yes, use
> >
> > 	pr_debug("APIC: NR_CPUS/possible_cpus limit of %i reached. Processor %d/0x%x ignored.\n",
> > 		 max, thiscpu, apicid);
>
> Ahh, I see, I got such change from clang formatter.
>
> >
> > or better
> >
> > 	printk(KERN_DEBUG "APIC: NR_CPUS/possible_cpus limit of %i reached. Processor %d/0x%x ignored.\n",
> > 	       max, thiscpu, apicid);
> >
> > > > And this would probably be better as
> > > >
> > > > 		printk(KERN_DEBUG "APIC: etc...",
> > > > 		 ...)
> > > >
> > > > to avoid the need to compile with DEBUG or enable
> > > > with CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG
> > >
> > > You don't need anything like this, just provide dyndbg parameters
> > > through kernel command line.
> >
> > That assumes CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG is always enabled,
> > and it is not enabled in many .config files.
>
> No problem.

ok, I tested your variant and it still prints a t least on my systems,
so it won't solve my problem. I'll keep this patch as is.

Thanks for the review.

>
> Thanks
>
> >
> >



Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)