linux-kernel - Re: [patch 6/6] x86: cpumask_of_node() should handle -1 as a node

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 7 Jan 2010 11:09:10 +1030
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 6/6] x86: cpumask_of_node() should handle -1 as a node

On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 10:21:06 am David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2010, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> 
> > I don't like the use of -1 as a node, but it's much more widespread than
> > x86; including sh, powerpc, sparc and the generic topology code. eg:
> > 
> > 
> > #fdef CONFIG_PCI
> > extern int pcibus_to_node(struct pci_bus *pbus);
> > #else
> > static inline int pcibus_to_node(struct pci_bus *pbus)
> > {
> >         return -1;
> > }
> 
> This seems to be the same semantics that NUMA_NO_NODE was defined for, 
> it's not necessarily a special case.

It's widespread, and we've just had another bug due to pcibus_to_node handling
-1 and cpumask_of_node not.  (Search lkml for subject "[Regression] 2.6.33-rc2
 - pci: Commit e0cd516 causes OOPS").

So I think the evidence is in favor of just handling -1.

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/