linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] irqchip: sifive-plic: Implement irq_set

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, 19 Jan 2019 10:56:53 +0530
From:   Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] irqchip: sifive-plic: Implement irq_set_affinity()
 for SMP host

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:27 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> > +     if (!force)
> > +             cpu = cpumask_any_and(mask_val, cpu_online_mask);
> > +     else
> > +             cpu = cpumask_first(mask_val);
>
> Any reason for the inverted test?

Okay, I will not use inverted test here.

>
> Otherwise this looks fine to me:
>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>

Thanks,
Anup