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 Oct 2022 11:08:51 -0700 From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com> To: Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com> Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>, Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@...nalahti.fi>, Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>, openrisc@...ts.librecores.org, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>, Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Fix /proc/cpuinfo cpumask warning On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 05:58:43PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote: > Commit 78e5a3399421 ("cpumask: fix checking valid cpu range") has > started issuing warnings[*] when cpu indices equal to nr_cpu_ids - 1 > are passed to cpumask_next* functions. seq_read_iter() and cpuinfo's > start and next seq operations implement a pattern like > > n = cpumask_next(n - 1, mask); > show(n); > while (1) { > ++n; > n = cpumask_next(n - 1, mask); > if (n >= nr_cpu_ids) > break; > show(n); > } > > which will issue the warning when reading /proc/cpuinfo. > > [*] Warnings will only appear with DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS enabled. > > This series address the issue for x86 and riscv, but from a quick > grep of cpuinfo seq operations, I think at least openrisc, powerpc, > and s390 also need an equivalent patch. While the test is simple (see > next paragraph) I'm not equipped to test on each architecture. > > To test, just build a kernel with DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS enabled, boot to > a shell, do 'cat /proc/cpuinfo', and look for a kernel warning. > > While the patches are being posted together in a series since they're > for two different architectures they don't necessarily need to go > through the same tree. Acked-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists