linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V8 20/23] perf tools: making function set_max_cpu

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]

Date:	Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:24:53 -0700
From:	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
To:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 20/23] perf tools: making function set_max_cpu_num()
 non static

On 26 January 2016 at 11:51, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org> wrote:
> Em Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 10:08:21AM -0700, Mathieu Poirier escreveu:
>> On 25 January 2016 at 14:29, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org> wrote:
>> > Em Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 06:12:42PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
>> >> Em Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 01:46:22PM -0700, Mathieu Poirier escreveu:
>> >> > On 14 January 2016 at 14:46, Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org> wrote:
>> >> > I can't queue this patch for 4.6 without at least a reviewed by from you.
>> >>
>> >> This one I remember, looks ugly, the name set_max_cpu_num() looks
>> >> strange, when that was restricted (static) to that cpumap.c file, it
>> >> wasn't a problem, exporting it for wider usage looks bad.
>> >>
>> >> You've been waiting for this for quite a while, it seems, lemme stop
>> >> what I am doing to check this...
>> >
>> > So, please check the patch below, what you need then is just to use
>> > cpu__max_cpu().
>>
>> I like your approach - thanks for the review.  I will spin V9 when I
>> have received Adrian's comments.
>
> I'll take that as an Acked-by: and since this improves the current
> situation by hiding needlessly exported global variables, I'll get it in
> now, thanks.

I would have added this code in my patchset with the right authorship
- whatever works best for you.

Thanks,
Mathieu

>
> - Arnaldo