mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sander Vanheule <sander@svanheule.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	Sander Vanheule <sander@svanheule.net>
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/4] cpumask: Fix invalid uniprocessor mask assumption
Date: Sun,  5 Jun 2022 08:22:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cc1f7d3334348cccbf9fde091015a802f379a9be.1654410109.git.sander@svanheule.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1654410109.git.sander@svanheule.net>

On uniprocessor builds, any CPU mask is assumed to contain exactly one
CPU (cpu0). This assumption ignores the existence of empty masks,
resulting in incorrect behaviour.
cpumask_first_zero(), cpumask_next_zero(), and for_each_cpu_not() don't
provide behaviour matching the assumption that a UP mask is always "1",
and instead provide behaviour matching the empty mask.

Drop the incorrectly optimised code and use the generic implementations
in all cases.

Signed-off-by: Sander Vanheule <sander@svanheule.net>
---
Changes since v1:
- Drop UP implementations instead of trying to fix them
---
 include/linux/cpumask.h | 80 -----------------------------------------
 lib/Makefile            |  3 +-
 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 82 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/cpumask.h b/include/linux/cpumask.h
index fe29ac7cc469..d6add0e29ef4 100644
--- a/include/linux/cpumask.h
+++ b/include/linux/cpumask.h
@@ -116,85 +116,6 @@ static __always_inline unsigned int cpumask_check(unsigned int cpu)
 	return cpu;
 }
 
-#if NR_CPUS == 1
-/* Uniprocessor.  Assume all masks are "1". */
-static inline unsigned int cpumask_first(const struct cpumask *srcp)
-{
-	return 0;
-}
-
-static inline unsigned int cpumask_first_zero(const struct cpumask *srcp)
-{
-	return 0;
-}
-
-static inline unsigned int cpumask_first_and(const struct cpumask *srcp1,
-					     const struct cpumask *srcp2)
-{
-	return 0;
-}
-
-static inline unsigned int cpumask_last(const struct cpumask *srcp)
-{
-	return 0;
-}
-
-/* Valid inputs for n are -1 and 0. */
-static inline unsigned int cpumask_next(int n, const struct cpumask *srcp)
-{
-	return n+1;
-}
-
-static inline unsigned int cpumask_next_zero(int n, const struct cpumask *srcp)
-{
-	return n+1;
-}
-
-static inline unsigned int cpumask_next_and(int n,
-					    const struct cpumask *srcp,
-					    const struct cpumask *andp)
-{
-	return n+1;
-}
-
-static inline unsigned int cpumask_next_wrap(int n, const struct cpumask *mask,
-					     int start, bool wrap)
-{
-	/* cpu0 unless stop condition, wrap and at cpu0, then nr_cpumask_bits */
-	return (wrap && n == 0);
-}
-
-/* cpu must be a valid cpu, ie 0, so there's no other choice. */
-static inline unsigned int cpumask_any_but(const struct cpumask *mask,
-					   unsigned int cpu)
-{
-	return 1;
-}
-
-static inline unsigned int cpumask_local_spread(unsigned int i, int node)
-{
-	return 0;
-}
-
-static inline int cpumask_any_and_distribute(const struct cpumask *src1p,
-					     const struct cpumask *src2p) {
-	return cpumask_first_and(src1p, src2p);
-}
-
-static inline int cpumask_any_distribute(const struct cpumask *srcp)
-{
-	return cpumask_first(srcp);
-}
-
-#define for_each_cpu(cpu, mask)			\
-	for ((cpu) = 0; (cpu) < 1; (cpu)++, (void)mask)
-#define for_each_cpu_not(cpu, mask)		\
-	for ((cpu) = 0; (cpu) < 1; (cpu)++, (void)mask)
-#define for_each_cpu_wrap(cpu, mask, start)	\
-	for ((cpu) = 0; (cpu) < 1; (cpu)++, (void)mask, (void)(start))
-#define for_each_cpu_and(cpu, mask1, mask2)	\
-	for ((cpu) = 0; (cpu) < 1; (cpu)++, (void)mask1, (void)mask2)
-#else
 /**
  * cpumask_first - get the first cpu in a cpumask
  * @srcp: the cpumask pointer
@@ -324,7 +245,6 @@ extern int cpumask_next_wrap(int n, const struct cpumask *mask, int start, bool
 	for ((cpu) = -1;						\
 		(cpu) = cpumask_next_and((cpu), (mask1), (mask2)),	\
 		(cpu) < nr_cpu_ids;)
-#endif /* SMP */
 
 #define CPU_BITS_NONE						\
 {								\
diff --git a/lib/Makefile b/lib/Makefile
index 89fcae891361..6f26a429115b 100644
--- a/lib/Makefile
+++ b/lib/Makefile
@@ -34,10 +34,9 @@ lib-y := ctype.o string.o vsprintf.o cmdline.o \
 	 is_single_threaded.o plist.o decompress.o kobject_uevent.o \
 	 earlycpio.o seq_buf.o siphash.o dec_and_lock.o \
 	 nmi_backtrace.o nodemask.o win_minmax.o memcat_p.o \
-	 buildid.o
+	 buildid.o cpumask.o
 
 lib-$(CONFIG_PRINTK) += dump_stack.o
-lib-$(CONFIG_SMP) += cpumask.o
 
 lib-y	+= kobject.o klist.o
 obj-y	+= lockref.o
-- 
2.36.1


  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-05  6:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-05  6:22 [PATCH v3 0/4] cpumask: Fix invalid uniprocessor assumptions Sander Vanheule
2022-06-05  6:22 ` Sander Vanheule [this message]
2022-06-06  0:48   ` [PATCH v3 1/4] cpumask: Fix invalid uniprocessor mask assumption kernel test robot
2022-06-06 10:40     ` Andy Shevchenko
2022-06-08 17:59       ` Sander Vanheule
2022-06-06 19:14   ` Yury Norov
2022-06-07 12:06     ` Sander Vanheule
2022-06-05  6:22 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] lib/test: Introduce cpumask KUnit test suite Sander Vanheule
2022-06-05  6:31   ` Sander Vanheule
2022-06-06 10:36   ` Andy Shevchenko
2022-06-06 12:22     ` Sander Vanheule
2022-06-05  6:22 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] cpumask: Add UP optimised for_each_*_cpu versions Sander Vanheule
2022-06-05  6:22 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] cpumask: Update cpumask_next_wrap() signature Sander Vanheule
2022-06-06 10:37   ` Andy Shevchenko

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=cc1f7d3334348cccbf9fde091015a802f379a9be.1654410109.git.sander@svanheule.net \
    --to=sander@svanheule.net \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
    --cc=yury.norov@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®