linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/Xen: streamline (and fix) PV CPU enumeration

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <67fe1063-128a-7dfd-3d8d-8915a80b807d@oracle.com>
Date:   Fri, 29 Mar 2019 11:46:49 -0400
From:   Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To:     Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
Cc:     Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
        xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/Xen: streamline (and fix) PV CPU enumeration

On 3/29/19 11:12 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 29.03.19 at 14:42, <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com> wrote:
>> On 3/29/19 4:54 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 28.03.19 at 17:50, <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com> wrote:
>>>> Given especially xen_pv_smp_prepare_cpus(), I think re-working proper
>>>> setting of present/possible masks is well beyond the scope of your
>>>> original patch.
>>> Well, then the question is, what (if any) changes are you
>>> expecting me to make for this change to be acceptable? Or do
>>> you perhaps want me to add a 2nd patch on top addressing
>>> the other outlined anomalies?
>> If your goal is just to fix the dom0_max_vcpus issue then this patch is
>> sufficient (but the commit message should say that this is what the
>> patch is for).
>>
>> But if you are trying to make cpu masks management done properly then I
>> think this patch alone does not address this fully.
> I.e. folding the further items discussed into this patch would be
> fine by you? (I'm just trying to avoid having to go through
> several more rounds of patch submissions.)

If you decide to pursue this (mask management) then it's up to you ---
if you feel you can/should do it all in a single patch then I don't see
why not.

-boris