Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:21:37 -0700
From:   Muhammad Falak Wani <mwani@linux.microsoft.com>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc:     Muhammad Falak R Wani <falakreyaz@gmail.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libbpf: Use sysconf to simplify libbpf_num_possible_cpus
Message-ID: <20210922032137.GA19826@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net>
References: <20210921060434.26732-1-falakreyaz@gmail.com>
 <CAEf4Bzau7EdBifN_Y_Y3HVs6Mm_UogytTzjXE+vB+W_HTiprmA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4Bzau7EdBifN_Y_Y3HVs6Mm_UogytTzjXE+vB+W_HTiprmA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: bulk

> "This patch is a part ([0]) of libbpf-1.0 milestone.
> 
>   [0] Closes: https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf/issue/383
> 
> Please update in the next revision.
Sure, will send in a V2 of the patch.
> 
> 
> Also, keep in mind that we ask to use "[PATCH bpf-next]" prefix when
> submitting patches against the bpf-next kernel tree. It makes the
> intent clear and our BPF CI system knows which tree to test against.
> Thanks.
> 
Apologies, duly noted for subsequent patches.

> I'd say it's still a good idea for explicitness and to show that we
> didn't forget about it :) Plus, if it actually ever fails, we don't
> want to WRITE_ONCE() here, so please follow the same error handling
> logic as it was previously with parse_cpu_mask_file.
> 
> >
> >         WRITE_ONCE(cpus, tmp_cpus);
> >         return tmp_cpus;
Sure, will adhere to the coding style.

Thank you for your reivew.

-mfrw