[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878r2npxue.ffs@tglx>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 11:07:37 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Borislav Petkov
<bp@...en8.de>
Cc: x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-edac
<linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] EDAC updates for v6.9
On Mon, Mar 11 2024 at 18:12, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 at 08:57, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>>
>> - return topology_die_id(err->cpu) % amd_get_nodes_per_socket();
>> + return topology_amd_node_id(err->cpu) % topology_amd_nodes_per_pkg();
>
> Ho humm. Lookie here:
>
> static inline unsigned int topology_amd_nodes_per_pkg(void)
> { return 0; };
>
> that's the UP case.
>
> Yeah, I'm assuming nobody tests this for UP, but it's clearly wrong to
> potentially do that modulus by zero.
Duh. I clearly was not thinking at all when I wrote this.
Thanks for spotting it.
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists