[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87mswycztd.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2023 14:55:10 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
Brent Rowsell <browsell@...hat.com>,
Peter Hunt <pehunt@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] sched/core: Use zero length to reset cpumasks in
sched_setaffinity()
* Waiman Long:
> On 10/4/23 08:34, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Peter Zijlstra:
>>
>>> Subject: sched: Add CPU_FILL()
>>>
>>> Add the CPU_FILL() macros to easily create an all-set cpumask.
>>>
>>> FreeBSD also provides this macro with this semantic.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
>> My main concer is that obtaining the size of the mask, or at least an
>> approximiation is not exactly easy. If there's an expectation that
>> applications reset the mask more often than they do today (I don't have
>> the full context here), then we'd some decent interface to get the
>> approriate size.
>
> I believe the macro just use sizeof(cpu_set_t) as the size of the
> bitmask. It is the same case as in CPU_ZERO().
I mean the CPU_FILL_S macro also defined in the patch. Correctly
written applications should not use CPU_FILL and statically sized CPU
sets.
Thanks,
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists