[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1437634142.13972.12.camel@axtens.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:49:02 +1000
From: Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>
To: Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
Preeti U Murthy <preetium@...rew.cmu.edu>,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 7/7] powerpc/powernv: nest pmu cpumask and cpu
hotplug support
On Thu, 2015-07-23 at 12:18 +0530, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 22 July 2015 10:33 AM, Daniel Axtens wrote:
> >> +static void nest_change_cpu_context(int old_cpu, int new_cpu)
> >> +{
> >> + int i;
> >> +
> >> + for (i = 0; per_nest_pmu_arr[i] != NULL; i++)
> >> + perf_pmu_migrate_context(&per_nest_pmu_arr[i]->pmu,
> >> + old_cpu, new_cpu);
> > From patch 4, I see per_nest_pmu_arr is defined as:
> > +static struct nest_pmu *per_nest_pmu_arr[P8_NEST_MAX_PMUS];
> >
> > Therefore, does this loop need to have a check that
> > i < P8_NEST_MAX_PMUS?
>
> No, that is max possible pmu, but we may have only couple for nest pmus
> registered.
>
What if we have P8_NEST_MAX_PMUS registered? Then we'll check beyond the
end of the array...
> Thanks for the review comments
> Maddy
> >
>
--
Regards,
Daniel
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (861 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists