[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221031080604.6xei6c4e3ckhsvmy@kamzik>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 09:06:04 +0100
From: Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>,
Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@...nalahti.fi>,
Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>,
openrisc@...ts.librecores.org,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC PA SEMI PWRFICIENT"
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86: Fix /proc/cpuinfo cpumask warning
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 06:06:41PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 10:13:28AM -0500, Yury Norov wrote:
> > Because it's related to bitmap API usage and has been revealed after
> > some work in bitmaps.
>
> So first of all, that "fix" needs to explain what exactly it is fixing.
> Not "it fixes this and that warning" but why the input arg to
> cpumask_next() cannot be nr_cpu_ids because... yadda yadda...
Hi Boris,
I didn't realize you were still looking for improvements to the commit
message for this patch. I could add something like,
The valid cpumask range is [0, nr_cpu_ids) and cpumask_next() always
returns a CPU ID greater than its input, which results in its input
range being [-1, nr_cpu_ids - 1). Ensure showing CPU info avoids
triggering error conditions in cpumask_next() by stopping its loop
over CPUs when its input would be invalid.
Thanks,
drew
>
> > And because nobody else cares.
>
> Why do you assume that?
>
> > If you're willing to move it yourself please go ahead.
>
> If it fixes a real issue, we are taking it. And pls note that x86
> patches go through the tip tree.
>
> Thx.
>
> --
> Regards/Gruss,
> Boris.
>
> https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists