linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 02/21] ACPI / processor: Introduce phys_cpuid

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: <CAJZ5v0hu=TB4S00krNk1RpsXeHJVud2ehhcM0dZDhHAk6DamKg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 5 Mar 2015 14:23:56 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:	Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@....com>,
	Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
	Ashwin Chaugule <ashwinc@...eaurora.org>,
	suravee.suthikulpanit@....com,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 02/21] ACPI / processor: Introduce phys_cpuid_t for CPU
 hardware ID

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com> wrote:
> On 2015/3/5 6:29, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 04:39:42 PM Hanjun Guo wrote:

[cut]

>>> @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ int acpi_map_cpuid(int phys_id, u32 acpi_id)
>>>              if (nr_cpu_ids <= 1 && acpi_id == 0)
>>>                      return acpi_id;
>>>              else
>>> -                    return phys_id;
>>> +                    return -1;
>> Can we use a proper error code here?
>
> I'm afraid not. In ACPI processor drivers, -1 will be deemed to
> invalid cpu logical number, if we return error code here, we need
> to modify multi places of "if (cpu_logical_num == -1)" to

Oh, silly stuff.

> "if (! (cpu_logical_num < 0))" too, so for me, I prefer to keep it as
> -1, but I'm open for suggestions.

OK

I think we need something like invalid_logical_cpuid() and use it
in all of those checks instead of the direct comparisons, but we
can make those changes later.

Rafael
--
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/