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]
Message-ID: <20240820030126.236997-3-chenridong@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:01:25 +0000
From: Chen Ridong <chenridong@...wei.com>
To: <tj@...nel.org>, <lizefan.x@...edance.com>, <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	<longman@...hat.com>, <adityakali@...gle.com>, <sergeh@...nel.org>,
	<mkoutny@...e.com>
CC: <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 -next 2/3] cgroup/cpuset: remove fetch_xcpus

Both fetch_xcpus and user_xcpus functions are used to retrieve the value
of exclusive_cpus. If exclusive_cpus is not set, cpus_allowed is the
implicit value used as exclusive in a local partition. I can not imagine
a scenario where effective_xcpus is not empty when exclusive_cpus is
empty. Therefore, I suggest removing the fetch_xcpus function.

Signed-off-by: Chen Ridong <chenridong@...wei.com>
---
 kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 13 +++----------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index 0ae68e0e5733..92e79ddc8188 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -771,13 +771,6 @@ static inline bool xcpus_empty(struct cpuset *cs)
 	       cpumask_empty(cs->exclusive_cpus);
 }
 
-static inline struct cpumask *fetch_xcpus(struct cpuset *cs)
-{
-	return !cpumask_empty(cs->exclusive_cpus) ? cs->exclusive_cpus :
-	       cpumask_empty(cs->effective_xcpus) ? cs->cpus_allowed
-						  : cs->effective_xcpus;
-}
-
 /*
  * cpusets_are_exclusive() - check if two cpusets are exclusive
  *
@@ -785,8 +778,8 @@ static inline struct cpumask *fetch_xcpus(struct cpuset *cs)
  */
 static inline bool cpusets_are_exclusive(struct cpuset *cs1, struct cpuset *cs2)
 {
-	struct cpumask *xcpus1 = fetch_xcpus(cs1);
-	struct cpumask *xcpus2 = fetch_xcpus(cs2);
+	struct cpumask *xcpus1 = user_xcpus(cs1);
+	struct cpumask *xcpus2 = user_xcpus(cs2);
 
 	if (cpumask_intersects(xcpus1, xcpus2))
 		return false;
@@ -2585,7 +2578,7 @@ static int update_cpumask(struct cpuset *cs, struct cpuset *trialcs,
 		invalidate = true;
 		rcu_read_lock();
 		cpuset_for_each_child(cp, css, parent) {
-			struct cpumask *xcpus = fetch_xcpus(trialcs);
+			struct cpumask *xcpus = user_xcpus(trialcs);
 
 			if (is_partition_valid(cp) &&
 			    cpumask_intersects(xcpus, cp->effective_xcpus)) {
-- 
2.34.1


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ