linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 37/86] sched: make test_*_tsk_thread

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Wed, 8 Nov 2023 10:02:50 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, paulmck@...nel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        luto@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, willy@...radead.org, mgorman@...e.de,
        jon.grimm@....com, bharata@....com, raghavendra.kt@....com,
        boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
        jgross@...e.com, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, mingo@...nel.org,
        bristot@...nel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
        geert@...ux-m68k.org, glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de,
        anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com, mattst88@...il.com,
        krypton@...ich-teichert.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        David.Laight@...lab.com, richard@....at, mjguzik@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 37/86] sched: make test_*_tsk_thread_flag() return
 bool

On Tue, Nov 07, 2023 at 01:57:23PM -0800, Ankur Arora wrote:
> All users of test_*_tsk_thread_flag() treat the result value
> as boolean. This is also true for the underlying test_and_*_bit()
> operations.
> 
> Change the return type to bool.
> 
> Originally-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>

You're sending 86 patches, I'm thinking you should do everything humanly
possible to reduce this patch count, so perhaps keep these in a separate
series.

This is irrelevant to the issue at hand. So send it as a separate
cleanup or whatever.

> ---
>  include/linux/sched.h | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 5f0d7341cb88..12d0626601a0 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -2045,17 +2045,17 @@ static inline void update_tsk_thread_flag(struct task_struct *tsk, int flag,
>  	update_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(tsk), flag, value);
>  }
>  
> -static inline int test_and_set_tsk_thread_flag(struct task_struct *tsk, int flag)
> +static inline bool test_and_set_tsk_thread_flag(struct task_struct *tsk, int flag)
>  {
>  	return test_and_set_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(tsk), flag);
>  }
>  
> -static inline int test_and_clear_tsk_thread_flag(struct task_struct *tsk, int flag)
> +static inline bool test_and_clear_tsk_thread_flag(struct task_struct *tsk, int flag)
>  {
>  	return test_and_clear_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(tsk), flag);
>  }
>  
> -static inline int test_tsk_thread_flag(struct task_struct *tsk, int flag)
> +static inline bool test_tsk_thread_flag(struct task_struct *tsk, int flag)
>  {
>  	return test_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(tsk), flag);
>  }
> @@ -2070,7 +2070,7 @@ static inline void clear_tsk_need_resched(struct task_struct *tsk)
>  	clear_tsk_thread_flag(tsk,TIF_NEED_RESCHED);
>  }
>  
> -static inline int test_tsk_need_resched(struct task_struct *tsk)
> +static inline bool test_tsk_need_resched(struct task_struct *tsk)
>  {
>  	return unlikely(test_tsk_thread_flag(tsk,TIF_NEED_RESCHED));
>  }
> -- 
> 2.31.1
>