[patch] cpu: remove some dead code in store_cache_disable()

[patch] cpu: remove some dead code in store_cache_disable()

[Dan Carpenter]

amd_set_l3_disable_slot() never returns -EEXIST, it only returns -EINVAL
or zero.

Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
index 73d08ed..7b4e294 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
@@ -466,12 +466,9 @@ static ssize_t store_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info *this_leaf,
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	err = amd_set_l3_disable_slot(this_leaf->base.nb, cpu, slot, val);
-	if (err) {
-		if (err = -EEXIST)
-			printk(KERN_WARNING "L3 disable slot %d in use!\n",
-					    slot);
+	if (err)
 		return err;
-	}
+
 	return count;
 }
 

Re: [patch] cpu: remove some dead code in store_cache_disable()

[Srivatsa S. Bhat]

On 04/19/2012 12:30 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:

> amd_set_l3_disable_slot() never returns -EEXIST, it only returns -EINVAL
> or zero.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> index 73d08ed..7b4e294 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> @@ -466,12 +466,9 @@ static ssize_t store_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info *this_leaf,
>  		return -EINVAL;
> 
>  	err = amd_set_l3_disable_slot(this_leaf->base.nb, cpu, slot, val);
> -	if (err) {
> -		if (err = -EEXIST)
> -			printk(KERN_WARNING "L3 disable slot %d in use!\n",
> -					    slot);
> +	if (err)
>  		return err;
> -	}
> +
>  	return count;
>  }
> 


Looking at the comments around the code and the print statement your patch
is trying to remove, I wonder if it would be more appropriate to return
-EEXIST in amd_set_l3_disable_slot(), like this:

---
From: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH] cpu: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot()

If the L3 disable slot is already in use, return -EEXIST instead of -EINVAL.
The caller, store_cache_disable(), checks this return value to print an
appropriate warning.

Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---

 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
index 73d08ed..0b49e29 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
@@ -433,7 +433,7 @@ int amd_set_l3_disable_slot(struct amd_northbridge *nb, int cpu, unsigned slot,
 	/*  check if @slot is already used or the index is already disabled */
 	ret = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, slot);
 	if (ret >= 0)
-		return -EINVAL;
+		return -EEXIST;
 
 	if (index > nb->l3_cache.indices)
 		return -EINVAL;


Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat

Re: [patch] cpu: remove some dead code in store_cache_disable()

[Borislav Petkov]

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 01:48:02PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 04/19/2012 12:30 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 
> > amd_set_l3_disable_slot() never returns -EEXIST, it only returns -EINVAL
> > or zero.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> > index 73d08ed..7b4e294 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> > @@ -466,12 +466,9 @@ static ssize_t store_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info *this_leaf,
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> > 
> >  	err = amd_set_l3_disable_slot(this_leaf->base.nb, cpu, slot, val);
> > -	if (err) {
> > -		if (err = -EEXIST)
> > -			printk(KERN_WARNING "L3 disable slot %d in use!\n",
> > -					    slot);
> > +	if (err)
> >  		return err;
> > -	}
> > +
> >  	return count;
> >  }
> > 
> 
> 
> Looking at the comments around the code and the print statement your patch
> is trying to remove, I wonder if it would be more appropriate to return
> -EEXIST in amd_set_l3_disable_slot(), like this:
> 
> ---
> From: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] cpu: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot()
> 
> If the L3 disable slot is already in use, return -EEXIST instead of -EINVAL.
> The caller, store_cache_disable(), checks this return value to print an
> appropriate warning.
> 
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> 
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> index 73d08ed..0b49e29 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> @@ -433,7 +433,7 @@ int amd_set_l3_disable_slot(struct amd_northbridge *nb, int cpu, unsigned slot,
>  	/*  check if @slot is already used or the index is already disabled */
>  	ret = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, slot);
>  	if (ret >= 0)
> -		return -EINVAL;
> +		return -EEXIST;
>  
>  	if (index > nb->l3_cache.indices)
>  		return -EINVAL;

Well, let's see, there's 8cc1176e5de534d55cb26ff0cef3fd0d6ad8c3c0 which
was intending at looking at -EEXIST when it gets returned but forgot to
return it at the end. Crap. Somebody should b*tchslap its author... oh,
that's me.

Good catch guys, thanks. I'll take a bit enhanced version of Srivatsa's
patch because it goes in the way of what was originally intended. The
enhanced version returns -EEXIST for the other slot too when we're
disabling the same index, see below:

--
From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:35:08 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] x86, intel_cacheinfo: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot()

If the L3 disable slot is already in use, return -EEXIST instead of
-EINVAL. The caller, store_cache_disable(), checks this return value to
print an appropriate warning.

Also, we want to signal with -EEXIST that the current index we're
disabling has actually been already disabled on the node:

$ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_0
$ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_0
-bash: echo: write error: File exists
$ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_1
-bash: echo: write error: File exists
$ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/cache/index3/cache_disable_1
-bash: echo: write error: File exists

The old code would say

-bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument

for disable slot 1 when playing the example above with no output in
dmesg, which is clearly misleading.

Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120419070053.GB16645@elgon.mountain
[Boris: add testing for the other index too]
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c |    8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
index 73d08ed98a64..b8f3653dddbc 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
@@ -433,14 +433,14 @@ int amd_set_l3_disable_slot(struct amd_northbridge *nb, int cpu, unsigned slot,
 	/*  check if @slot is already used or the index is already disabled */
 	ret = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, slot);
 	if (ret >= 0)
-		return -EINVAL;
+		return -EEXIST;
 
 	if (index > nb->l3_cache.indices)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	/* check whether the other slot has disabled the same index already */
 	if (index = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, !slot))
-		return -EINVAL;
+		return -EEXIST;
 
 	amd_l3_disable_index(nb, cpu, slot, index);
 
@@ -468,8 +468,8 @@ static ssize_t store_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info *this_leaf,
 	err = amd_set_l3_disable_slot(this_leaf->base.nb, cpu, slot, val);
 	if (err) {
 		if (err = -EEXIST)
-			printk(KERN_WARNING "L3 disable slot %d in use!\n",
-					    slot);
+			pr_warning("L3 slot %d in use/index already disabled!\n",
+				   slot);
 		return err;
 	}
 	return count;
-- 
1.7.9.3.362.g71319


-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551

Re: [patch] cpu: remove some dead code in store_cache_disable()

[Srivatsa S. Bhat]

On 04/19/2012 04:32 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 01:48:02PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>> On 04/19/2012 12:30 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>
>>> amd_set_l3_disable_slot() never returns -EEXIST, it only returns -EINVAL
>>> or zero.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
>>> index 73d08ed..7b4e294 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
>>> @@ -466,12 +466,9 @@ static ssize_t store_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info *this_leaf,
>>>  		return -EINVAL;
>>>
>>>  	err = amd_set_l3_disable_slot(this_leaf->base.nb, cpu, slot, val);
>>> -	if (err) {
>>> -		if (err = -EEXIST)
>>> -			printk(KERN_WARNING "L3 disable slot %d in use!\n",
>>> -					    slot);
>>> +	if (err)
>>>  		return err;
>>> -	}
>>> +
>>>  	return count;
>>>  }
>>>
>>
>>
>> Looking at the comments around the code and the print statement your patch
>> is trying to remove, I wonder if it would be more appropriate to return
>> -EEXIST in amd_set_l3_disable_slot(), like this:
>>
>> ---
>> From: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Subject: [PATCH] cpu: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot()
>>
>> If the L3 disable slot is already in use, return -EEXIST instead of -EINVAL.
>> The caller, store_cache_disable(), checks this return value to print an
>> appropriate warning.
>>
>> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>
>>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c |    2 +-
>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
>> index 73d08ed..0b49e29 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
>> @@ -433,7 +433,7 @@ int amd_set_l3_disable_slot(struct amd_northbridge *nb, int cpu, unsigned slot,
>>  	/*  check if @slot is already used or the index is already disabled */
>>  	ret = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, slot);
>>  	if (ret >= 0)
>> -		return -EINVAL;
>> +		return -EEXIST;
>>  
>>  	if (index > nb->l3_cache.indices)
>>  		return -EINVAL;
> 
> Well, let's see, there's 8cc1176e5de534d55cb26ff0cef3fd0d6ad8c3c0 which
> was intending at looking at -EEXIST when it gets returned but forgot to
> return it at the end. Crap. Somebody should b*tchslap its author... oh,
> that's me.
> 
> Good catch guys, thanks. I'll take a bit enhanced version of Srivatsa's
> patch because it goes in the way of what was originally intended. The
> enhanced version returns -EEXIST for the other slot too when we're
> disabling the same index, see below:
> 

> --

> From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 12:35:08 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] x86, intel_cacheinfo: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot()
> 
> If the L3 disable slot is already in use, return -EEXIST instead of
> -EINVAL. The caller, store_cache_disable(), checks this return value to
> print an appropriate warning.
> 
> Also, we want to signal with -EEXIST that the current index we're
> disabling has actually been already disabled on the node:
> 
> $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_0
> $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_0
> -bash: echo: write error: File exists
> $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_1
> -bash: echo: write error: File exists
> $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/cache/index3/cache_disable_1
> -bash: echo: write error: File exists
> 
> The old code would say
> 
> -bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument
> 
> for disable slot 1 when playing the example above with no output in
> dmesg, which is clearly misleading.
> 
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120419070053.GB16645@elgon.mountain
> [Boris: add testing for the other index too]
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c |    8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> index 73d08ed98a64..b8f3653dddbc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> @@ -433,14 +433,14 @@ int amd_set_l3_disable_slot(struct amd_northbridge *nb, int cpu, unsigned slot,
>  	/*  check if @slot is already used or the index is already disabled */
>  	ret = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, slot);
>  	if (ret >= 0)
> -		return -EINVAL;
> +		return -EEXIST;
> 
>  	if (index > nb->l3_cache.indices)
>  		return -EINVAL;
> 
>  	/* check whether the other slot has disabled the same index already */
>  	if (index = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, !slot))
> -		return -EINVAL;
> +		return -EEXIST;
> 
>  	amd_l3_disable_index(nb, cpu, slot, index);
> 
> @@ -468,8 +468,8 @@ static ssize_t store_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info *this_leaf,
>  	err = amd_set_l3_disable_slot(this_leaf->base.nb, cpu, slot, val);
>  	if (err) {
>  		if (err = -EEXIST)
> -			printk(KERN_WARNING "L3 disable slot %d in use!\n",
> -					    slot);
> +			pr_warning("L3 slot %d in use/index already disabled!\n",
> +				   slot);
>  		return err;
>  	}
>  	return count;


Wow, that's even better! Thanks :-)

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat

Re: [patch] cpu: remove some dead code in store_cache_disable()

[Dan Carpenter]

Great.  Thanks.

regards,
dan carpenter

[GIT PULL] L3 CID fix for 3.5

[Borislav Petkov]

Hi guys,

please pull the following fix for L3 cache index disable into tip. Since
there's no real breakage but simply a correctness issue, it can wait for
3.5. I've also removed the stable tag I had in the previous version.

Thanks.

--
The following changes since commit e816b57a337ea3b755de72bec38c10c864f23015:

  Linux 3.4-rc3 (2012-04-15 18:28:29 -0700)

are available in the git repository at:

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bp/bp.git tags/l3-fix-for-3.5

for you to fetch changes up to a720b2dd2470a52345df11dca8d6c1466599f812:

  x86, intel_cacheinfo: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot() (2012-04-19 18:30:28 +0200)

----------------------------------------------------------------
A small L3 cache index disable fix from Srivatsa Bhat which unifies the
way the code checks for already disabled indices.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Srivatsa S. Bhat (1):
      x86, intel_cacheinfo: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot()

 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c |    8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Appending patch here too:

--
commit a720b2dd2470a52345df11dca8d6c1466599f812
Author: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Thu Apr 19 12:35:08 2012 +0200

    x86, intel_cacheinfo: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot()
    
    If the L3 disable slot is already in use, return -EEXIST instead of
    -EINVAL. The caller, store_cache_disable(), checks this return value to
    print an appropriate warning.
    
    Also, we want to signal with -EEXIST that the current index we're
    disabling has actually been already disabled on the node:
    
    $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_0
    $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_0
    -bash: echo: write error: File exists
    $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_1
    -bash: echo: write error: File exists
    $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/cache/index3/cache_disable_1
    -bash: echo: write error: File exists
    
    The old code would say
    
    -bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument
    
    for disable slot 1 when playing the example above with no output in
    dmesg, which is clearly misleading.
    
    Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
    Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
    Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120419070053.GB16645@elgon.mountain
    [Boris: add testing for the other index too]
    Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
index 73d08ed98a64..b8f3653dddbc 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
@@ -433,14 +433,14 @@ int amd_set_l3_disable_slot(struct amd_northbridge *nb, int cpu, unsigned slot,
 	/*  check if @slot is already used or the index is already disabled */
 	ret = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, slot);
 	if (ret >= 0)
-		return -EINVAL;
+		return -EEXIST;
 
 	if (index > nb->l3_cache.indices)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	/* check whether the other slot has disabled the same index already */
 	if (index = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, !slot))
-		return -EINVAL;
+		return -EEXIST;
 
 	amd_l3_disable_index(nb, cpu, slot, index);
 
@@ -468,8 +468,8 @@ static ssize_t store_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info *this_leaf,
 	err = amd_set_l3_disable_slot(this_leaf->base.nb, cpu, slot, val);
 	if (err) {
 		if (err = -EEXIST)
-			printk(KERN_WARNING "L3 disable slot %d in use!\n",
-					    slot);
+			pr_warning("L3 slot %d in use/index already disabled!\n",
+				   slot);
 		return err;
 	}
 	return count;

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551

Re: [GIT PULL] L3 CID fix for 3.5

[Borislav Petkov]

Ping?

Guys, any issues with this that I should know of?

Thanks.

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 06:53:53PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> please pull the following fix for L3 cache index disable into tip. Since
> there's no real breakage but simply a correctness issue, it can wait for
> 3.5. I've also removed the stable tag I had in the previous version.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --
> The following changes since commit e816b57a337ea3b755de72bec38c10c864f23015:
> 
>   Linux 3.4-rc3 (2012-04-15 18:28:29 -0700)
> 
> are available in the git repository at:
> 
>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bp/bp.git tags/l3-fix-for-3.5
> 
> for you to fetch changes up to a720b2dd2470a52345df11dca8d6c1466599f812:
> 
>   x86, intel_cacheinfo: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot() (2012-04-19 18:30:28 +0200)
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> A small L3 cache index disable fix from Srivatsa Bhat which unifies the
> way the code checks for already disabled indices.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Srivatsa S. Bhat (1):
>       x86, intel_cacheinfo: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot()
> 
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c |    8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> Appending patch here too:
> 
> --
> commit a720b2dd2470a52345df11dca8d6c1466599f812
> Author: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date:   Thu Apr 19 12:35:08 2012 +0200
> 
>     x86, intel_cacheinfo: Fix error return code in amd_set_l3_disable_slot()
>     
>     If the L3 disable slot is already in use, return -EEXIST instead of
>     -EINVAL. The caller, store_cache_disable(), checks this return value to
>     print an appropriate warning.
>     
>     Also, we want to signal with -EEXIST that the current index we're
>     disabling has actually been already disabled on the node:
>     
>     $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_0
>     $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_0
>     -bash: echo: write error: File exists
>     $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index3/cache_disable_1
>     -bash: echo: write error: File exists
>     $ echo 12 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/cache/index3/cache_disable_1
>     -bash: echo: write error: File exists
>     
>     The old code would say
>     
>     -bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument
>     
>     for disable slot 1 when playing the example above with no output in
>     dmesg, which is clearly misleading.
>     
>     Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>     Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120419070053.GB16645@elgon.mountain
>     [Boris: add testing for the other index too]
>     Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> index 73d08ed98a64..b8f3653dddbc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
> @@ -433,14 +433,14 @@ int amd_set_l3_disable_slot(struct amd_northbridge *nb, int cpu, unsigned slot,
>  	/*  check if @slot is already used or the index is already disabled */
>  	ret = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, slot);
>  	if (ret >= 0)
> -		return -EINVAL;
> +		return -EEXIST;
>  
>  	if (index > nb->l3_cache.indices)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
>  	/* check whether the other slot has disabled the same index already */
>  	if (index = amd_get_l3_disable_slot(nb, !slot))
> -		return -EINVAL;
> +		return -EEXIST;
>  
>  	amd_l3_disable_index(nb, cpu, slot, index);
>  
> @@ -468,8 +468,8 @@ static ssize_t store_cache_disable(struct _cpuid4_info *this_leaf,
>  	err = amd_set_l3_disable_slot(this_leaf->base.nb, cpu, slot, val);
>  	if (err) {
>  		if (err = -EEXIST)
> -			printk(KERN_WARNING "L3 disable slot %d in use!\n",
> -					    slot);
> +			pr_warning("L3 slot %d in use/index already disabled!\n",
> +				   slot);
>  		return err;
>  	}
>  	return count;
> 
> -- 
> Regards/Gruss,
> Boris.
> 
> Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
> Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
> GM: Alberto Bozzo
> Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
> HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551
> _______________________________________________
> osrc-patches mailing list
> osrc-patches@elbe.amd.com
> https://elbe.amd.com/mailman/listinfo/osrc-patches

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551

Re: [GIT PULL] L3 CID fix for 3.5

[Ingo Molnar]

* Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com> wrote:

> Ping?
> 
> Guys, any issues with this that I should know of?

Looks good to me. You marked it v3.5, should I pull it into 
v3.4? Looks small enough to me and we better keep such user 
facing interfaces correct, even if there's no direct regression.

Thanks,

	Ingo

Re: [GIT PULL] L3 CID fix for 3.5

[Borislav Petkov]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:23:58PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Looks good to me. You marked it v3.5, should I pull it into v3.4?
> Looks small enough to me and we better keep such user facing
> interfaces correct, even if there's no direct regression.

I'm fine with whatever you decide,

thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551