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: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 13:42:46 -0600 From: Steve Wahl <steve.wahl@....com> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Cc: Steve Wahl <steve.wahl@....com>, rja_direct@...ups.int.hpe.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf/x86/intel/uncore: With > 8 nodes, get pci bus die id from NUMA info On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 04:07:15PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 09:45:16AM -0600, Steve Wahl wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 02:00:33PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 09:35:49AM -0600, Steve Wahl wrote: > > > > > > > > > > + /* > > > > + * The nodeid and idmap registers only contain enough > > > > + * information to handle 8 nodes. On systems with more > > > > + * than 8 nodes, we need to rely on NUMA information, > > > > + * filled in from BIOS supplied information, to determine > > > > + * the topology. > > > > + */ > > > > > > Egads.. do we realy have to trust BIOS data? BIOS crud tends to be > > > bonghits qualitee :/ > > > > I work too close to BIOS people (virtually, at least for the moment) > > to safely make disparaging remarks. :-) While the origin is the BIOS, > > I'm using pieces that were already being pulled from the BIOS tables > > for NUMA purposes. > > :-) It's just that we've had too much 'fun' with PCI node bindings in > the past. I wasn't aware of that, but I understand. Fortunately, this patch should't touch cases that aren't already broken (>8 nodes); working cases continue to use the existing methods. Thanks! --> Steve Wahl -- Steve Wahl, Hewlett Packard Enterprise
Powered by blists - more mailing lists