From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
To: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 8/9] cpumask: Add initialiser CPUMASK_NULL to use cleanup helpers
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2025 08:34:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aMqq6zr7_dJveu3o@yury> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1d15af4ab9f8f63dafbf4810a76eb3d547217596.camel@redhat.com>
On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 02:08:06PM +0200, Gabriele Monaco wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-09-17 at 07:38 -0400, Yury Norov wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 09:51:47AM +0200, Gabriele Monaco wrote:
> > > According to what I can understand from the standard, the C list
> > > initialisation sets to the default value (e.g. 0) all elements not
> > > present in the initialiser. Since in {} no element is present, {}
> > > is not a no-op but it initialises the entire cpumask to 0.
> > >
> > > Am I missing your original intent here?
> > > It doesn't look like a big price to pay, but I'd still reword the
> > > sentence to something like:
> > > "and a valid struct initializer when CPUMASK_OFFSTACK is disabled."
> >
> > The full quote is:
> >
> > So define a CPUMASK_NULL macro, which allows to init struct cpumask
> > pointer with NULL when CPUMASK_OFFSTACK is enabled, and effectively
> > a no-op when CPUMASK_OFFSTACK is disabled.
> >
> > If you read the 'which allows' part, it makes more sense, isn't?
>
> Alright, my bad for trimming the sentence, what I wanted to highlight
> is that with !CPUMASK_OFFSTACK this CPUMASK_NULL becomes something like
>
> struct cpumask mask[1] = {};
>
> which, to me, doesn't look like a no-op as the description suggests,
> but an initialisation of the entire array.
>
> Now I'm not sure if the compiler would be smart enough to optimise this
> assignment out, but it doesn't look obvious to me.
>
> Unless you were meaning the __free() becomes a no-op (which is true but
> out of scope in this version of the patch), I would avoid mentioning
> the no-op altogether.
>
> Am I missing something and that initialisation is proven to be compiled
> out?
When you create a non-initialized variable on stack, compiler does
nothing about it, except for adjusting an argument to brk() emitted in
the function prologue.
In this case, non-initialized struct cpumask is already on stack, and
switching from
struct cpumask mask[1];
to
struct cpumask mask[1] = {};
is really a no-op.
Thanks,
Yury
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-17 12:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-15 14:59 [PATCH v12 0/9] timers: Exclude isolated cpus from timer migration Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 14:59 ` [PATCH v12 1/9] timers/migration: Postpone online/offline callbacks registration to late initcall Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 14:59 ` [PATCH v12 2/9] timers: Rename tmigr 'online' bit to 'available' Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 14:59 ` [PATCH v12 3/9] timers: Add the available mask in timer migration Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 14:59 ` [PATCH v12 4/9] timers: Use scoped_guard when setting/clearing the tmigr available flag Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 14:59 ` [PATCH v12 5/9] cgroup/cpuset: Rename update_unbound_workqueue_cpumask() to update_exclusion_cpumasks() Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 14:59 ` [PATCH v12 6/9] sched/isolation: Force housekeeping if isolcpus and nohz_full don't leave any Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 14:59 ` [PATCH v12 7/9] cgroup/cpuset: Fail if isolated and nohz_full don't leave any housekeeping Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 20:43 ` Waiman Long
2025-09-16 8:31 ` Chen Ridong
2025-09-15 14:59 ` [PATCH v12 8/9] cpumask: Add initialiser CPUMASK_NULL to use cleanup helpers Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 16:04 ` Yury Norov
2025-09-15 17:02 ` Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 18:35 ` Yury Norov
2025-09-16 11:27 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-09-17 7:51 ` Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-17 11:38 ` Yury Norov
2025-09-17 12:08 ` Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-17 12:34 ` Yury Norov [this message]
2025-09-19 14:58 ` Yury Norov
2025-09-22 10:07 ` Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 14:59 ` [PATCH v12 9/9] timers: Exclude isolated cpus from timer migration Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-15 20:51 ` John B. Wyatt IV
2025-09-16 5:29 ` Gabriele Monaco
2025-09-16 13:41 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=aMqq6zr7_dJveu3o@yury \
--to=yury.norov@gmail.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=gmonaco@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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