linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] sched/deadline: Change return value of cpudl

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, 12 Jul 2017 14:22:32 +0100
From:   Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
To:     Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Cc:     peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, juri.lelli@...il.com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, bristot@...hat.com, kernel-team@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] sched/deadline: Change return value of
 cpudl_find()

Hi,

On 23/05/17 11:00, Byungchul Park wrote:
> Currently cpudl_find() returns the best cpu that means it has the
> maximum dl, however, the value is already kept in later_mask and the
> return value is not referred directly any more.
> 
> Now, it's enough to return whether CPUs were found or not, like rt.
> 

I'd reword as

cpudl_find() users are only interested in knowing if suitable CPU(s)
were found or not (and then they look at later_mask to know which).

Change cpudl_find() return type accordingly.

> Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/cpudeadline.c | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
>  kernel/sched/deadline.c    |  6 +++---
>  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpudeadline.c b/kernel/sched/cpudeadline.c
> index fba235c..7408cbe 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpudeadline.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpudeadline.c
> @@ -119,29 +119,29 @@ static inline int cpudl_maximum(struct cpudl *cp)
>   * @p: the task
>   * @later_mask: a mask to fill in with the selected CPUs (or NULL)
>   *
> - * Returns: int - best CPU (heap maximum if suitable)
> + * Returns: (int)bool - CPUs were found

Why not simply bool?

Thanks,

- Juri