linux-kernel - Re: mmotm 2013-02-19-17-20 uploaded

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]

Message-ID: <51267626.3030308@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:31:50 -0800
From:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:	Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@....com>
CC:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mm-commits@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: mmotm 2013-02-19-17-20 uploaded

On 2/21/2013 10:35 AM, Nathan Zimmer wrote:
>
>> This comment is useful around the cpumask functions.
>>
>>      Returns >= nr_cpu_ids if no further cpus set.
>>
> I had assumed it would be = nr_cpu_ids.
> I will need to rethink the iterator.

Yes it is actually equal to the nr_cpu_ids in my error case. On my
system, nr_cpu_ids = 4 and I only have one cpu online.

>
>
> Also I retested my other patches in the series, the ones for schedstat
> and sched_debug, and those worked fine.

I haven't tried those yet. I will try to take a look.

Also, can't we simplify the code by calling cpumask_next() with the
first argument being -1? No more cpu > 0 check?

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation

--
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/