linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] arch_topology: Remove early cacheinfo error message

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]

Message-ID: <20230413-craving-frying-59031194587e@wendy>
Date:   Thu, 13 Apr 2023 11:25:33 +0100
From:   Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
To:     Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@....com>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Radu Rendec <rrendec@...hat.com>,
        Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@...osinc.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...osinc.com>,
        Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] arch_topology: Remove early cacheinfo error
 message

On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 11:02:49AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 11:14:33AM +0200, Pierre Gondois wrote:
> > fetch_cache_info() tries to get the number of cache leaves/levels
> > for each CPU in order to pre-allocate memory for cacheinfo struct.
> > Allocating this memory later triggers a:
> >   'BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context'
> > in PREEMPT_RT kernels.
> > 
> > If there is no cache related information available in DT or ACPI,
> > fetch_cache_info() fails and an error message is printed:
> >   'Early cacheinfo failed, ret = ...'
> > 
> > Not having cache information should be a valid configuration.
> > Remove the error message if fetch_cache_info() fails.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
> 
> Not that it really matters for suggested-by, and there's no way really
> for you to know, but the corporate overlords prefer:
> s/conor@...nel.org/conor.dooley@...rochip.com/
> 
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230404-hatred-swimmer-6fecdf33b57a@spud/
> > Signed-off-by: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@....com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 4 +---
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > index b1c1dd38ab01..1f071eaede5b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > @@ -843,10 +843,8 @@ void __init init_cpu_topology(void)
> >  
> >  	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> >  		ret = fetch_cache_info(cpu);
> > -		if (ret) {
> > -			pr_err("Early cacheinfo failed, ret = %d\n", ret);
> 
> Hmm do you really want to remove the print altogether? This can fail
> with -EINVAL and -ENOMEM too, so should we just check for
> | if (ret && ret != -ENOENT)
> instead, since in the other cases it really did fail?

To save Sudeep (potentially) waiting for me when you resubmit, with that
change:
Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>

Thanks,
Conor.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)