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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20151013032301.GL5386@linux> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:53:01 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> To: Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org> Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] cpufreq: Use cpumask_copy instead of cpumask_or to copy a mask On 12-10-15, 12:12, Saravana Kannan wrote: > > if (new_policy) { > > /* related_cpus should at least include policy->cpus. */ > >- cpumask_or(policy->related_cpus, policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus); > >+ cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus); > > Again, why? It actually seems wrong. A 4 core cluster could come up > with just 2 cores when the policy is added. But the related CPUs > would be 4 CPUs. Firstly, the patch hasn't changed anything at all. related_cpus was empty until this point, and orring or setting it with ->cpus will result in the same output. Secondly, this is what we always wanted. related_cpus should contain the mask of all possible CPUs for that cluster. -- viresh -- 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