[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201005150922.572999500@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2020 16:57:33 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
qais.yousef@....com, swood@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
valentin.schneider@....com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
bristot@...hat.com, vincent.donnefort@....com, tj@...nel.org
Subject: [PATCH -v2 16/17] sched/proc: Print accurate cpumask vs migrate_disable()
Ensure /proc/*/status doesn't print 'random' cpumasks due to
migrate_disable().
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
---
fs/proc/array.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/fs/proc/array.c
+++ b/fs/proc/array.c
@@ -382,9 +382,9 @@ static inline void task_context_switch_c
static void task_cpus_allowed(struct seq_file *m, struct task_struct *task)
{
seq_printf(m, "Cpus_allowed:\t%*pb\n",
- cpumask_pr_args(task->cpus_ptr));
+ cpumask_pr_args(&task->cpus_mask));
seq_printf(m, "Cpus_allowed_list:\t%*pbl\n",
- cpumask_pr_args(task->cpus_ptr));
+ cpumask_pr_args(&task->cpus_mask));
}
static inline void task_core_dumping(struct seq_file *m, struct mm_struct *mm)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists