linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 3/6] arm64: smp: Remove dedicated wakeup IPI

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAE-0n50va9r7wrRzbK2KduNPdNNimiKT9CkuP=meA6JaoMTpWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Aug 2023 16:16:37 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc:     Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@...iatek.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net, ito-yuichi@...itsu.com,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Masayoshi Mizuma <msys.mizuma@...il.com>,
        D Scott Phillips <scott@...amperecomputing.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@...aro.org>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 3/6] arm64: smp: Remove dedicated wakeup IPI

Quoting Douglas Anderson (2023-08-22 14:26:58)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> index 9b31e6d0da17..798fd76a883a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> @@ -89,9 +89,9 @@ extern void arch_send_call_function_single_ipi(int cpu);
>  extern void arch_send_call_function_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask);
>
>  #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_ACPI_PARKING_PROTOCOL
> -extern void arch_send_wakeup_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask);
> +extern void arch_send_wakeup_ipi(int cpu);

Is int used instead of unsigned int because we want to sometimes pass a
negative value to indicate an error? Maybe it should be unsigned int.