linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/acpi: acpi_is_processor

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]

Date:   Wed, 29 Mar 2023 14:34:02 -0500
From:   "Limonciello, Mario" <mario.limonciello@....com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@...cle.com>
Cc:     rafael@...nel.org, lenb@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
        hpa@...or.com, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvijayab@....com,
        miguel.luis@...cle.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/acpi: acpi_is_processor_usable() dropping
 possible cpus

On 3/27/2023 15:25, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 03:07:23PM -0500, Eric DeVolder wrote:
>> https://ueif.org/sites/default/files/resources/ACPI_6_3_May16.pdf
>> Section 5.2.12 MADT. Table 5-43 is the MADT Revision is numbered 5.
>> However, ACPI 6.x specs got a little "sloppy" with Revision,
> 
> Yes, I've found what you're pointing out too. But exactly because of
> this sloppiness I'd like to see this more explicitly. Because we're
> basing functionality off of it and it is not some meaningless
> paperweight anymore.
> 

Boris and I talked offline and got the situation clarified.
The corrected patch for MADT version handling is sent here:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20230329174536.6931-1-mario.limonciello@amd.com/T/#u

Eric - Your patch is still needed though.