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: <xhsmh8rehkxzz.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb> Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2023 18:09:52 +0100 From: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com> To: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Pawel Chmielewski <pawel.chmielewski@...el.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] lib: add test for for_each_numa_{cpu,hop_mask}() On 19/04/23 22:19, Yury Norov wrote: > + for (node = 0; node < sched_domains_numa_levels; node++) { > + unsigned int hop, c = 0; > + > + rcu_read_lock(); > + for_each_numa_cpu(cpu, hop, node, cpu_online_mask) > + expect_eq_uint(cpumask_local_spread(c++, node), cpu); > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + } I'm not fond of the export of sched_domains_numa_levels, especially considering it's just there for tests. Furthermore, is there any value is testing parity with cpumask_local_spread()? Rather, shouldn't we check that using this API does yield CPUs of increasing NUMA distance? Something like for_each_node(node) { unsigned int prev_cpu, hop = 0; cpu = cpumask_first(cpumask_of_node(node)); prev_cpu = cpu; rcu_read_lock(); /* Assert distance is monotonically increasing */ for_each_numa_cpu(cpu, hop, node, cpu_online_mask) { expect_ge_uint(cpu_to_node(cpu), cpu_to_node(prev_cpu)); prev_cpu = cpu; } rcu_read_unlock(); }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists