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: <e9ef4100-0b87-b61a-5ad4-5f78b2d61783@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Mar 2018 13:38:44 +0800
From:   Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <x86@...nel.org>,
        <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <corbet@....net>,
        <rjw@...ysocki.net>, <lenb@...nel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/smpboot: Make the check code more clear in
 prefill_possible_map()

Hi Peter,

At 03/20/2018 08:39 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 07:04:30PM +0800, Dou Liyang wrote:
>> case 1: no  | no  | no | -->  min (setup_possible_cpus, nr_cpu_ids, setup_max_cpus)
>> case 2: no  | no  | yes| -->  min (setup_possible_cpus, nr_cpu_ids)
>> case 3: no  | yes | no | -->  1
>> case 4: no  | yes | yes| -->  1
>> case 5: yes | no  | no | -->  min (num_processors, nr_cpu_ids, setup_max_cpus)
>> case 6: yes | no  | yes| -->  min (num_processors + disabled_cpus, nr_cpu_ids)
>> case 7: yes | yes | no | -->  1
>> case 8: yes | yes | yes| -->  1
> 
> The case number is off by one ;-)
> 

I got it! ;-)

Thanks
	dou
> 
> 


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ