linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] cpumask: Rephrase comments for cpu

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z4pm5Nhhnoo-1OW2@vaxr-BM6660-BM6360>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 22:19:16 +0800
From: I Hsin Cheng <richard120310@...il.com>
To: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@...il.com>
Cc: yury.norov@...il.com, mark.rutland@....com, linux@...musvillemoes.dk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jserv@...s.ncku.edu.tw
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cpumask: Rephrase comments for cpu_any*() APIs

On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 09:48:39PM +0800, Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> Hi I Hsin,
> 
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 09:23:13PM +0800, I Hsin Cheng wrote:
> > The cpu_any*() APIs comment states that it returns a "random" cpu within
> > the given cpumask. However it's not actually random as random itself
> > stands a meaning for uniform distribution.
> > 
> > cpu_any*() APIs are a naming convention for the caller to states that it
> > doesn't care which CPU it gets, so change "random" to "arbitrary" would
> > be more appropriate.
> > 
> > v1 -> v2:
> > - Fix typo for Hoever/However
> > - Drop quotes around 'arbitrary' word
> 
> Don't add changelogs between versions above the ---. Add them below it.
> Anything beyond --- will be part of the permanent changelog.
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: I Hsin Cheng <richard120310@...il.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@...il.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> > Reviewed-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but Yury and Mark didn't explicitly give a
> Reviewed-by tag. Don't add any tags unless explicitly given.

I see, thanks alot!
I'm sorry for these mistakes, I'll correct them and send a v3.

Regards,
I Hsin

> 
> Regards,
> Kuan-Wei
> > ---
> >  include/linux/cpumask.h | 8 ++++----
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/cpumask.h b/include/linux/cpumask.h
> > index 9278a50d5..93be218fc 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/cpumask.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/cpumask.h
> > @@ -391,7 +391,7 @@ unsigned int __pure cpumask_next_wrap(int n, const struct cpumask *mask, int sta
> >  	for_each_set_bit_from(cpu, cpumask_bits(mask), small_cpumask_bits)
> >  
> >  /**
> > - * cpumask_any_but - return a "random" in a cpumask, but not this one.
> > + * cpumask_any_but - return an arbitrary cpu in a cpumask, but not this one.
> >   * @mask: the cpumask to search
> >   * @cpu: the cpu to ignore.
> >   *
> > @@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ unsigned int cpumask_any_but(const struct cpumask *mask, unsigned int cpu)
> >  }
> >  
> >  /**
> > - * cpumask_any_and_but - pick a "random" cpu from *mask1 & *mask2, but not this one.
> > + * cpumask_any_and_but - pick an arbitrary cpu from *mask1 & *mask2, but not this one.
> >   * @mask1: the first input cpumask
> >   * @mask2: the second input cpumask
> >   * @cpu: the cpu to ignore
> > @@ -840,7 +840,7 @@ void cpumask_copy(struct cpumask *dstp, const struct cpumask *srcp)
> >  }
> >  
> >  /**
> > - * cpumask_any - pick a "random" cpu from *srcp
> > + * cpumask_any - pick an arbitrary cpu from *srcp
> >   * @srcp: the input cpumask
> >   *
> >   * Return: >= nr_cpu_ids if no cpus set.
> > @@ -848,7 +848,7 @@ void cpumask_copy(struct cpumask *dstp, const struct cpumask *srcp)
> >  #define cpumask_any(srcp) cpumask_first(srcp)
> >  
> >  /**
> > - * cpumask_any_and - pick a "random" cpu from *mask1 & *mask2
> > + * cpumask_any_and - pick an arbitrary cpu from *mask1 & *mask2
> >   * @mask1: the first input cpumask
> >   * @mask2: the second input cpumask
> >   *
> > -- 
> > 2.43.0
> >