[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230523105935.GN83892@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2023 12:59:35 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>,
"Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [tip: sched/core] sched/topology: Introduce sched_group::flags
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 02:12:02PM -0000, tip-bot2 for Ricardo Neri wrote:
> index 4e8698e..c56faae 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> @@ -716,8 +716,20 @@ cpu_attach_domain(struct sched_domain *sd, struct root_domain *rd, int cpu)
> tmp = sd;
> sd = sd->parent;
> destroy_sched_domain(tmp);
> - if (sd)
> + if (sd) {
> + struct sched_group *sg = sd->groups;
> +
> + /*
> + * sched groups hold the flags of the child sched
> + * domain for convenience. Clear such flags since
> + * the child is being destroyed.
> + */
> + do {
> + sg->flags = 0;
> + } while (sg != sd->groups);
I happened to be reading this here code and aren't we missing:
sg = sg->next;
somewhere in that loop?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists