Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 28 Feb 2020 10:40:34 +0000
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To:     Zeng Tao <prime.zeng@hisilicon.com>
Cc:     linuxarm@huawei.com,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu-topology: Fix the potential data corruption
Message-ID: <20200228104034.GB26973@bogus>
References: <1582878945-50415-1-git-send-email-prime.zeng@hisilicon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1582878945-50415-1-git-send-email-prime.zeng@hisilicon.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 04:35:45PM +0800, Zeng Tao wrote:
> Currently there are only 10 bytes to store the cpu-topology info.
> That is:
> snprintf(buffer, 10, "cluster%d",i);
> snprintf(buffer, 10, "thread%d",i);
> snprintf(buffer, 10, "core%d",i);
>
> In the boundary test, if the cluster number exceeds 100, there will be a

I don't understand you mention of 100 in particular above. I can see issue
if there are cluster with more than 2-digit id. Though highly unlikely for
now, but I don't have objection to the patch.

--
Regards,
Sudeep