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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2020 15:29:41 +0100 From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...terjones.org> To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@...wei.com> Cc: Shiyuan Hu <hushiyuan@...wei.com>, Hewenliang <hewenliang4@...wei.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq/affinity: show managed irq affinity correctly On 2020-08-13 09:08, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@...wei.com> writes: [...] > You are looking at the wrong file. /proc/irq/$IRQ/smp_affinity* is the > possible mask. If you want to know to which CPU an interrupt is affine > then look at /proc/irq/$IRQ/effective_affinity* > > If effective_affinity* is not showing the correct value, then the irq > chip affinity setter is broken and needs to be fixed. In order to reassure myself that nothing was untoward in GIC-land, I went in and looked at an ITS-based VM running whatever is in Linus' tree today. I see the effective affinity being correctly setup, and being as expected a subset of the affinity. This is without isolcpu though. In any case, I'd be interested in understanding what this patch is trying to solve, really. M. -- Who you jivin' with that Cosmik Debris?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists