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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 16:15:24 -0700 From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> To: Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: rui.zhang@...el.com, tim.c.chen@...el.com, liaoyu15@...wei.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/tsc: use topology_max_packages() in tsc watchdog check On 10/17/22 06:29, Feng Tang wrote: > + if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CONSTANT_TSC) && > + boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_NONSTOP_TSC) && > + boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC_ADJUST) && > + topology_max_packages() <= 2) > + clocksource_tsc.flags &= ~CLOCK_SOURCE_MUST_VERIFY; I couldn't help but notice the comment in here: > void __init calculate_max_logical_packages(void) > { > int ncpus; > > /* > * Today neither Intel nor AMD support heterogeneous systems so > * extrapolate the boot cpu's data to all packages. > */ > ncpus = cpu_data(0).booted_cores * topology_max_smt_threads(); > __max_logical_packages = DIV_ROUND_UP(total_cpus, ncpus); > pr_info("Max logical packages: %u\n", __max_logical_packages); > } Could you double check for me that the Alder Lake combination Core/Atom CPUs don't count as "heterogeneous systems" in this case?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists