[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100408185216.GA28689@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 20:52:16 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] scheduler fix
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 8 Apr 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > So i'd suggest changing nr_cpu_ids to unsigned int [unless there's some strong
> > reason to have it signed] plus doing something like:
> >
> > if (len < (nr_cpu_ids >> BITS_PER_BYTE_BITS))
>
> No workee.
>
> It really should round up.
Indeed.
> If you worry about code generation, I'd suggest looking at whether
> nr_cpu_ids could just be made unsigned.
>
> Anyway, this all was _not_ the point of my original email. I really don't
> care about this particular instance. I care more about the whole "in general
> people should think _way_ more about validating user-supplied arguments than
> clearly happened this time".
Yeah, no argument about that, point taken and accepted.
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists