linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpu-topology: warn if NUMA configurations conflicts with lower layer

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: <20200109110514.GC10914@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 9 Jan 2020 11:05:14 +0000
From:   Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
To:     Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Cc:     "Zengtao (B)" <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu-topology: warn if NUMA configurations conflicts with
 lower layer

On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 03:31:24PM +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> Your issue is related to the 'numa mask check for scheduler MC
> selection' functionality.  It was introduced by commit 37c3ec2d810f and
> re-introduced by commit e67ecf647020 later. I don't know why we need
> this functionality?

That functionality is to ensure that we don't break the sched_domain
hierarchy for numa-in-cluster systems. We have to be sure that the MC
domain is always smaller or equal to the NUMA node span.

Morten