mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
To: "Mike Travis" <travis@sgi.com>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
	"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86: Change _node_to_cpumask_ptr to return const ptr
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 23:21:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <19f34abd0807081421j67771dbclfae1fcfaa9ad4bcd@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4873D33B.4040300@sgi.com>

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com> wrote:
> Vegard Nossum wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com> wrote:
>>>>> Note: I did not change node_to_cpumask_ptr() in include/asm-generic/topology.h
>>>>>      as node_to_cpumask_ptr_next() does change the cpumask value.
>>>> Hmmm. Does it really?
>>>>
>>>> #define node_to_cpumask_ptr_next(v, node)                               \
>>>>                           _##v = node_to_cpumask(node)
>>>>
>>>> This doesn't seem to modify it?
>>> Well I thought about it.  The pointer (*v) does not change
>>> but the underlying cpumask variable is updated with the
>>> cpumask for the (supposedly) new node number.  You can see
>>> that in this code snippet from kernel/sched.c:
>>>
>>>        for (i = 1; i < SD_NODES_PER_DOMAIN; i++) {
>>>                int next_node = find_next_best_node(node, &used_nodes);
>>>
>>>                node_to_cpumask_ptr_next(nodemask, next_node);
>>>                cpus_or(*span, *span, *nodemask);
>>>        }
>>>
>>> In the optimized (x86_64) case, the pointer is simply modified
>>> to point to the new node_to_cpumask_map[node] entry.  It remains
>>> a pointer to a const value.
>>>
>>> But the non-optimized version replaces the const cpumask value
>>> with the new cpumask value.  Isn't this breaking the const
>>> attribute?
>>
>> No, I think the pointer really should be const. This doesn't guarantee
>> that the value doesn't change behind our backs, it only prevents us
>> from modifying it ourselves.
>>
>>
>> Vegard
>>
>
> Is this what you had in mind:
>
>
> --- linux-2.6.tip.orig/include/asm-generic/topology.h
> +++ linux-2.6.tip/include/asm-generic/topology.h
> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@
>  #ifndef node_to_cpumask_ptr
>
>  #define        node_to_cpumask_ptr(v, node)                                    \
> -               cpumask_t _##v = node_to_cpumask(node), *v = &_##v
> +               const cpumask_t _##v = node_to_cpumask(node), *v = &_##v
>
>  #define node_to_cpumask_ptr_next(v, node)                              \
>                          _##v = node_to_cpumask(node)
>
>
> (It's taking a while as now I need to do some cross-compile testing.)

Actually, no.

We don't want the _##v to be const, do we? What do you think about
this? (Watch out for whitespace munges)

diff --git a/include/asm-generic/topology.h b/include/asm-generic/topology.h
index a6aea79..56957f2 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/topology.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/topology.h
@@ -60,7 +60,8 @@
 #ifndef node_to_cpumask_ptr

 #define        node_to_cpumask_ptr(v, node)
-               cpumask_t _##v = node_to_cpumask(node), *v = &_##v
+               cpumask_t _##v = node_to_cpumask(node);                 \
+               const cpumask_t *v = &_##v;

 #define node_to_cpumask_ptr_next(v, node)                              \
                          _##v = node_to_cpumask(node)


Vegard

-- 
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
	-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036

  reply	other threads:[~2008-07-08 21:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <200806090918.m599Ib0G012837@imap1.linux-foundation.org>
     [not found] ` <19f34abd0806090420r4100241cgb4b828441de3b102@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]   ` <20080609113547.GA1534@elte.hu>
     [not found]     ` <484D54F2.4070603@sgi.com>
     [not found]       ` <20080626113229.GB29619@elte.hu>
2008-06-26 16:26         ` [PATCH 1/1] x86: Add check for node passed to node_to_cpumask Mike Travis
2008-06-27  2:39           ` [PATCH 1/1] x86: Add check for node passed to node_to_cpumask V2 Mike Travis
2008-06-27 17:10             ` [PATCH 1/1] x86: Add check for node passed to node_to_cpumask V3 Mike Travis
2008-06-27 17:24               ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-27 18:03                 ` Mike Travis
2008-06-29 11:34                   ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-29 12:40                     ` Mike Travis
2008-07-03  8:44               ` Ingo Molnar
2008-07-03  8:55                 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-07-03  9:01                   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-07-08 17:06                     ` [PATCH 1/1] x86: Change _node_to_cpumask_ptr to return const ptr Mike Travis
2008-07-08 17:35                       ` Vegard Nossum
2008-07-08 18:05                         ` Mike Travis
2008-07-08 18:22                           ` Vegard Nossum
2008-07-08 20:51                             ` Mike Travis
2008-07-08 21:21                               ` Vegard Nossum [this message]
2008-07-08 21:28                                 ` Mike Travis
2008-07-08 21:35                                 ` Mike Travis
2008-07-08 21:52                                   ` Vegard Nossum
2008-07-13 17:12                                     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-07-07 17:23                   ` [PATCH 1/1] x86: Add check for node passed to node_to_cpumask V3 Mike Travis

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=19f34abd0807081421j67771dbclfae1fcfaa9ad4bcd@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=mm-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=travis@sgi.com \
    --cc=yhlu.kernel@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®