From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751866AbeCUFiz (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 21 Mar 2018 01:38:55 -0400
Received: from mail.cn.fujitsu.com ([183.91.158.132]:49725 "EHLO
        heian.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751689AbeCUFix (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 21 Mar 2018 01:38:53 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.43,368,1503331200";
   d="scan'208";a="38028796"
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/smpboot: Make the check code more clear in
 prefill_possible_map()
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <x86@kernel.org>,
        <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        <tglx@linutronix.de>, <mingo@redhat.com>, <corbet@lwn.net>,
        <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, <lenb@kernel.org>, <hpa@zytor.com>
References: <20180320110432.28127-1-douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
 <20180320110432.28127-4-douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
 <20180320123918.GS4043@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From: Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Message-ID: <e9ef4100-0b87-b61a-5ad4-5f78b2d61783@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 13:38:44 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180320123918.GS4043@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.167.226.106]
X-yoursite-MailScanner-ID: 423094D0EFD1.A9689
X-yoursite-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-yoursite-MailScanner-From: douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Peter,

At 03/20/2018 08:39 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 07:04:30PM +0800, Dou Liyang wrote:
>> case 1: no  | no  | no | -->  min (setup_possible_cpus, nr_cpu_ids, setup_max_cpus)
>> case 2: no  | no  | yes| -->  min (setup_possible_cpus, nr_cpu_ids)
>> case 3: no  | yes | no | -->  1
>> case 4: no  | yes | yes| -->  1
>> case 5: yes | no  | no | -->  min (num_processors, nr_cpu_ids, setup_max_cpus)
>> case 6: yes | no  | yes| -->  min (num_processors + disabled_cpus, nr_cpu_ids)
>> case 7: yes | yes | no | -->  1
>> case 8: yes | yes | yes| -->  1
> 
> The case number is off by one ;-)
> 

I got it! ;-£©

Thanks
	dou
> 
>