| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20250908061923.543081-1-wujianyong@hygon.cn> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 14:19:23 +0800 From: Jianyong Wu <wujianyong@...on.cn> To: <mingo@...hat.com>, <peterz@...radead.org>, <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, <riel@...riel.com>, <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, <jianyong.wu@...look.com>, <wujianyong@...on.cn> CC: <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, <rostedt@...dmis.org>, <bsegall@...gle.com>, <mgorman@...e.de>, <vschneid@...hat.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: [PATCH] sched/fair: Correct misleading comment in task_numa_migrate() 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> [1] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/55806A24.7030403@redhat.com/ --- kernel/sched/fair.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index b173a059315c..9069ea4c71f1 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c @@ -2565,7 +2565,7 @@ static int task_numa_migrate(struct task_struct *p) groupweight = group_weight(p, env.src_nid, dist); } - /* Only consider nodes where both task and groups benefit */ + /* Consider nodes where either task or groups benefit */ taskimp = task_weight(p, nid, dist) - taskweight; groupimp = group_weight(p, nid, dist) - groupweight; if (taskimp < 0 && groupimp < 0) -- 2.43.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists