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:   Thu, 13 Jul 2017 10:24:21 +0900
From:   Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To:     Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....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()

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 02:22:32PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
> 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.

Hi,

Much better. Thank you very much. I will change it.

> 
> > 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?

I just did it same as rt.

> Thanks,
> 
> - Juri