From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] cpumask: force nr_cpumask_bit to NR_CPUS for CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=n
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:25:05 +1030
Message-ID: <200812132025.06514.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
References: <200812082136.33212.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <200812101019.42908.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <49417B99.7090004@sgi.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:35728 "EHLO ozlabs.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754458AbYLMJzL (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-next@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 13 Dec 2008 04:55:11 -0500
In-Reply-To: <49417B99.7090004@sgi.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-next.vger.kernel.org>
To: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@googlemail.com>, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-next@vger.kernel.org

On Friday 12 December 2008 07:14:09 Mike Travis wrote:
> Re: cpumask conversions, or not?
> 
> Rusty Russell wrote:
> > On Tuesday 09 December 2008 21:26:36 Mike Travis wrote:
> >> Rusty Russell wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>>    The new cpumask conversions are going well, but unfortunately Stephen
> >>> uncovered a nasty bug via linux-next: the new cpumask operators only go to
> >>> nr_cpumask_bits which can be less than NR_CPUS if NR_CPUS > BITS_PER_LONG.
> >>> The undefined bits confuse the old cpumask operators.  We fixed one case,
> >>> but I am concerned that we will break archs as we convert more core code.
> >> Hi Rusty,
> >>
> >> I think we can avoid this problem if we make cpumask_bits == NR_CPUS iff
> >> CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=n.  This complies with the current cpumask_t
> >> approach and should cause all cpumask operators to always operate on
> >> all cpumask bits.
> > 
> > A very good point.  And it's no worse than the old method.
> > 
> > OK, forget about this for now, no urgent conversions needed :)
> > Rusty.
> 
> This probably should be submitted through linux-next for wider test coverage?

Identical patch already in series.

Thanks,
Rusty.