linux-kernel - [PATCH 3.16 001/192] sched: Rename a misleading variable in build_overlap_sched

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: <lsq.1507553064.764041083@decadent.org.uk>
Date:   Mon, 09 Oct 2017 13:44:24 +0100
From:   Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
CC:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Zhihui Zhang" <zzhsuny@...il.com>,
        "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3.16 001/192] sched: Rename a misleading variable in
 build_overlap_sched_groups()

3.16.49-rc1 review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Zhihui Zhang <zzhsuny@...il.com>

commit aaecac4ad46b35ad308245384d019633fb9bc21b upstream.

The child variable in build_overlap_sched_groups() actually refers to the
peer or sibling domain of the given CPU. Rename it to sibling to be consistent
with the naming in build_group_mask().

Signed-off-by: Zhihui Zhang <zzhsuny@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1406942283-18249-1-git-send-email-zzhsuny@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
---
 kernel/sched/core.c | 13 ++++++-------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -5808,7 +5808,7 @@ build_overlap_sched_groups(struct sched_
 	const struct cpumask *span = sched_domain_span(sd);
 	struct cpumask *covered = sched_domains_tmpmask;
 	struct sd_data *sdd = sd->private;
-	struct sched_domain *child;
+	struct sched_domain *sibling;
 	int i;
 
 	cpumask_clear(covered);
@@ -5819,10 +5819,10 @@ build_overlap_sched_groups(struct sched_
 		if (cpumask_test_cpu(i, covered))
 			continue;
 
-		child = *per_cpu_ptr(sdd->sd, i);
+		sibling = *per_cpu_ptr(sdd->sd, i);
 
 		/* See the comment near build_group_mask(). */
-		if (!cpumask_test_cpu(i, sched_domain_span(child)))
+		if (!cpumask_test_cpu(i, sched_domain_span(sibling)))
 			continue;
 
 		sg = kzalloc_node(sizeof(struct sched_group) + cpumask_size(),
@@ -5832,10 +5832,9 @@ build_overlap_sched_groups(struct sched_
 			goto fail;
 
 		sg_span = sched_group_cpus(sg);
-		if (child->child) {
-			child = child->child;
-			cpumask_copy(sg_span, sched_domain_span(child));
-		} else
+		if (sibling->child)
+			cpumask_copy(sg_span, sched_domain_span(sibling->child));
+		else
 			cpumask_set_cpu(i, sg_span);
 
 		cpumask_or(covered, covered, sg_span);