From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-s390-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23960FA3740
	for <linux-s390@archiver.kernel.org>; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 08:59:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S230085AbiJaI7M (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-s390@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 31 Oct 2022 04:59:12 -0400
Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41434 "EHLO
        lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S229682AbiJaI7I (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 31 Oct 2022 04:59:08 -0400
Received: from mail.skyhub.de (mail.skyhub.de [5.9.137.197])
        by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BDE41D3;
        Mon, 31 Oct 2022 01:59:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ea9733e7cf329c23fffea6a903.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ea:9733:e7cf:329c:23ff:fea6:a903])
        (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
        (No client certificate requested)
        by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id B91D91EC0531;
        Mon, 31 Oct 2022 09:59:06 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim;
        t=1667206746;
        h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
         to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
         content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:  references:references;
        bh=ev78IiojEqGZ8VOXUxmz9XVfROk+6cN5zzZ8OowFM8w=;
        b=eI/C2tSlcg0AxMZOuPZM7vJKKoRmjE6inbkFlcyC7xyapkJ4fbL6uqhy9LxHWWR24ASGVE
        A/YY8Nzaqhc5keG/EfmGhgdQunAK7K3mp31A11nA8qzGhVzkP/b4DF6aS9rc2MXsmebhdy
        KGNWf+tkEEOxBllDztC3oUYW5H3eT+s=
Date:   Mon, 31 Oct 2022 09:58:57 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
Cc:     Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Jonas Bonn <jonas@southpole.se>,
        Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@saunalahti.fi>,
        Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>,
        openrisc@lists.librecores.org,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        "open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC PA SEMI PWRFICIENT" 
        <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
        Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86: Fix /proc/cpuinfo cpumask warning
Message-ID: <Y1+OUawGJDjh4DOJ@zn.tnic>
References: <20221014155845.1986223-1-ajones@ventanamicro.com>
 <20221014155845.1986223-3-ajones@ventanamicro.com>
 <20221028074828.b66uuqqfbrnjdtab@kamzik>
 <Y1vrMMtRwb0Lekl0@yury-laptop>
 <Y1vvMlwf/4EA/8WW@zn.tnic>
 <CAAH8bW_DkvPCH0-q2Bfe0OJ72r63mRM3GP7NKOFrhe3zMO2gbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y1v+Ed6mRN9gisJS@zn.tnic>
 <20221031080604.6xei6c4e3ckhsvmy@kamzik>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20221031080604.6xei6c4e3ckhsvmy@kamzik>
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-s390.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 09:06:04AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
>  The valid cpumask range is [0, nr_cpu_ids) and cpumask_next() always
>  returns a CPU ID greater than its input, which results in its input
>  range being [-1, nr_cpu_ids - 1). Ensure showing CPU info avoids
>  triggering error conditions in cpumask_next() by stopping its loop

What error conditions?

What would happen if @n is outside of the valid range?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette