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:   Thu, 13 Jun 2019 21:00:19 +0000
From:   "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:     "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/8] EDAC/amd64: Fix number of DIMMs and Chip Select
 bases/masks on Family17h

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2019 8:58 AM
> To: Ghannam, Yazen <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>
> Cc: linux-edac@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] EDAC/amd64: Fix number of DIMMs and Chip Select bases/masks on Family17h
> 
> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:45:11PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> > From: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
> >
> > ...because AMD Family 17h systems support 2 DIMMs, 4 CS bases, and 2 CS
> > masks per channel.
> >
> > Fixes: 07ed82ef93d6 ("EDAC, amd64: Add Fam17h debug output")
> > Signed-off-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c | 5 ++++-
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c b/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c
> > index 873437be86d9..9fa2f205f05c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c
> > +++ b/drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c
> > @@ -810,7 +810,7 @@ static void debug_display_dimm_sizes_df(struct amd64_pvt *pvt, u8 ctrl)
> >
> >  	edac_printk(KERN_DEBUG, EDAC_MC, "UMC%d chip selects:\n", ctrl);
> >
> > -	for (dimm = 0; dimm < 4; dimm++) {
> > +	for (dimm = 0; dimm < 2; dimm++) {
> >  		size0 = 0;
> >  		cs0 = dimm * 2;
> >
> > @@ -942,6 +942,9 @@ static void prep_chip_selects(struct amd64_pvt *pvt)
> >  	} else if (pvt->fam == 0x15 && pvt->model == 0x30) {
> >  		pvt->csels[0].b_cnt = pvt->csels[1].b_cnt = 4;
> >  		pvt->csels[0].m_cnt = pvt->csels[1].m_cnt = 2;
> > +	} else if (pvt->fam >= 0x17) {
> > +		pvt->csels[0].b_cnt = pvt->csels[1].b_cnt = 4;
> > +		pvt->csels[0].m_cnt = pvt->csels[1].m_cnt = 2;
> 
> I guess it is about time that function gets turned into a switch-case so
> that the assignment lines do not get duplicated.
> 

Okay, I'll write up a patch for that.

Do you have any tips on how to handle it? I'm thinking it may be tricky because of the ranges and multiple variables.

Thanks,
Yazen

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ