lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86, cpuinfo x86_model_id whitespace cleanup
From
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com> wrote:
> When comparing 'model name' fields in /proc/cpuinfo it was noticed that
> a simple test comparing the model name fields was failing. After some
> quick investigation it was noticed that the model name fields were actually
> different -- processor 0's model name field had trailing white space removed,
> while the other processors did not.
>
> Another way of seeing this behaviour is to convert spaces into underscores
> in the output of /proc/cpuinfo,
>
> [thetango@prarit ~]# grep "^model name" /proc/cpuinfo | uniq -c | sed 's/\ /_/g'
> ______1_model_name :_AMD_Opteron(TM)_Processor_6272
> _____63_model_name :_AMD_Opteron(TM)_Processor_6272_________________
>
> which shows two different model name fields even though they should be the
> same.
>
> This occurs because the kernel calls strim() on cpu 0's x86_model_id field
> to output a pretty message to the console in print_cpu_info(), and as a
> result truncates the whitespace at the end of the x86_model_id field.
>
> The x86_model_id field should be the same for the same processors. This
> patch uses string functions to remove both leading and trailing whitespace
> in the x86_model_id field. As a result the print_cpu_info() output looks
> like
>
> smpboot: CPU0: AMD Opteron(TM) Processor 6272 (fam: 15, model: 01, stepping: 02)
>
> and the x86_model_id field is correct on all processors on AMD platforms
>
> [thetango@prarit ~]# grep "^model name" /proc/cpuinfo | uniq -c | sed 's/\ /_/g'
> _____64_model_name :_AMD_Opteron(TM)_Processor_6272
>
> and the functionality is correct on an Intel box:
>
> [thetango@prarit2]# grep "^model name" /proc/cpuinfo | uniq -c | sed 's/\ /_/g'
> ____144_model_name :_Intel(R)_Xeon(R)_CPU_E7-8890_v3_@_2.50GHz
>
> Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
> Cc: x86@kernel.org
> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
> Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
> Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 17 ++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> index a62cf04..9405c1e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> @@ -419,7 +419,6 @@ static const struct cpu_dev *cpu_devs[X86_VENDOR_NUM] = {};
> static void get_model_name(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> {
> unsigned int *v;
> - char *p, *q;
>
> if (c->extended_cpuid_level < 0x80000004)
> return;
> @@ -431,18 +430,10 @@ static void get_model_name(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> c->x86_model_id[48] = 0;
>
> /*
> - * Intel chips right-justify this string for some dumb reason;
> - * undo that brain damage:
> + * Remove leading whitespace on Intel processors and trailing
> + * whitespace on AMD processors.
> */
> - p = q = &c->x86_model_id[0];
> - while (*p == ' ')
> - p++;
> - if (p != q) {
> - while (*p)
> - *q++ = *p++;
> - while (q <= &c->x86_model_id[48])
> - *q++ = '\0'; /* Zero-pad the rest */
> - }
> + strlcpy(c->x86_model_id, strim(c->x86_model_id), 48);
> }

Using strlcpy in this manner could fail if it does larger than byte
copies and they overlap. I would instead allocate a temp buffer on
the stack:

unsigned char model_id[49];
v = (unsigned int *)model_id;
...
strlcpy(c->x86_model_id, strim(model_id), 48);

--
Brian Gerst


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-19 20:21    [W:0.102 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site