linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: Further simplify the NR

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:   Sat, 10 Feb 2018 14:19:04 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: Further simplify the NR_CPUS config

Looks good to me.

At the risk of bike-shedding, we could remove all the

        default    1 if !SMP

from the BEGIN/END/DEFAULT things, and perhaps just keep that part in NR_CPUS.

I didn't check, but I *think* it would work to just do

 config NR_CPUS
        int "Maximum number of CPUs" if SMP && !MAXSMP
        range NR_CPUS_RANGE_BEGIN NR_CPUS_RANGE_END
        default "1" if !SMP
        default NR_CPUS_DEFAULT

but maybe the "range" line would need an "if !SMP" on it too to avoid
the issue with "1" being out of range.,

That would still leave the NR_CPUS thing *much* easier to understand,
and it would mean that the other helper things wouldn't need to care
about the UP case.

But regardless, that least version looks perfectly fine to me even
without that random tweak.

              Linus