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: <20150928173529.GF48470@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:35:29 -0700
From:	Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
	anton@...ba.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cl@...ux.com,
	gkurz@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, grant.likely@...aro.org,
	nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC  3/5] powerpc:numa create 1:1 mappaing between chipid
 and nid

On 27.09.2015 [23:59:11 +0530], Raghavendra K T wrote:
> Once we have made the distinction between nid and chipid
> create a 1:1 mapping between them. This makes compacting the
> nids easy later.
> 
> No functionality change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> index f84ed2f..dd2073b 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> @@ -264,6 +264,17 @@ out:
>  	return chipid;
>  }
> 
> +
> + /* Return the nid from associativity */
> +static int associativity_to_nid(const __be32 *associativity)
> +{
> +	int nid;
> +
> +	nid = associativity_to_chipid(associativity);
> +	return nid;
> +}

This is ultimately confusing. You are assigning the semantic return
value of a chipid to a nid -- is it a nid or a chipid? Shouldn't the
variable naming be consistent?

--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ