linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] sched/topology: Adding function partition_sched_domains

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, 14 Jun 2018 15:47:31 +0200
From:   Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it,
        claudio@...dence.eu.com, tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it,
        bristot@...hat.com, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org, lizefan@...wei.com,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] sched/topology: Adding function
 partition_sched_domains_locked()

On 14/06/18 09:35, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 14:17:08 +0200
> Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com> wrote:

[...]

> > +/*
> > + * Call with hotplug lock held
> > + */
> > +void partition_sched_domains(int ndoms_new, cpumask_var_t doms_new[],
> > +			     struct sched_domain_attr *dattr_new)
> > +{
> > +	lockdep_assert_cpus_held();
> 
> Is the above assert really necessary? The assert will happen in
> partition_sched_domains_locked() anyway.

Indeed, it seems of little use.

Thanks,

- Juri