linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Correct misleading comment in task_numa

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: <46380ec48c4d2e2d01a229650129066bb3d6c329.camel@surriel.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2025 12:25:49 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
To: Jianyong Wu <wujianyong@...on.cn>, mingo@...hat.com,
 peterz@...radead.org, 	juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
 jianyong.wu@...look.com
Cc: dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, 
	mgorman@...e.de, vschneid@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Correct misleading comment in
 task_numa_migrate()

On Mon, 2025-09-08 at 14:19 +0800, Jianyong Wu wrote:
> The current comment implies that both the task and the group must get
> benefit for a node to be considered. However, the actual code allows
> a node to pass if *either* the task *or* the group meets the
> criteria.
> 
> As established in the previous discussion [1], the code logic is
> correct.
> Update the comment to accurately reflect that either condition is
> sufficient.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jianyong Wu <wujianyong@...on.cn>

Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>

-- 
All Rights Reversed.