linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/13] workqueue: remove WORK_CPU

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:	Mon, 4 Feb 2013 11:49:42 -0800
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] workqueue: remove WORK_CPU_NONE

Hello, Lai.

On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 02:41:24AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> In __next_wq_cpu() for_each_*wq_cpu(), the name WORK_CPU_LAST
> is proper than WORK_CPU_NONE, convert them to WORK_CPU_LAST.
> 
> WORK_CPU_NONE is not used any more, just remove it.
...
>  #define for_each_wq_cpu(cpu)						\
>  	for ((cpu) = __next_wq_cpu(-1, cpu_possible_mask, 3);		\
> -	     (cpu) < WORK_CPU_NONE;					\
> +	     (cpu) < WORK_CPU_LAST;					\
>  	     (cpu) = __next_wq_cpu((cpu), cpu_possible_mask, 3))

LAST implies that it's the last element of the range and thus that
it's an inclusive range.  Maybe we should rename it to WORK_CPU_END?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/