Received: by 2002:a05:6358:e9c4:b0:b2:91dc:71ab with SMTP id hc4csp6665340rwb; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 21:38:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR4A5z94jIUrBnxHyGMSD+d2KaAaNn+VVPF4iJ/LQU4Sit5s+h3jU17bePM72O3BeMCUhlZn X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:dc8a:b0:72b:7649:f5bb with SMTP id cs10-20020a170906dc8a00b0072b7649f5bbmr19114284ejc.637.1660106334792; Tue, 09 Aug 2022 21:38:54 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1660106334; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=nKeNyc9844tpepRqiHZLtFPugb9J65YTxpfy8sdXSZlcGsXa6XuWZz/MvywlYlL2jp ZUVWw63qilOCPe5RJnVU1iD3XxuAmGxBPqJDeC5H8gzM2/d+oON5obyyrlMsyELPPk+D yNCAZSfIL25gz56W9QVGkJTPjMRDIduwzsJizitF98et7U3Yr1lEvGXTA6MJ7AW5Zc18 gCRYOWqxYygMoLuL1A/T0bbj/vyvoqoAtLGMFMZZS8wKy+2pdcEOvDVDt0sDpKn0DYTc jr2bYdFGLLfmPBwmc5zJqM+mkD2cWTPkm9cIm88EKYh+/JlFI+eTpyfzn2yV0vqR5QlH rVeA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject :message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :dkim-signature; bh=qZm1fXghi6IF6e55IsqmlhKKwI7Wy4DqK9Waf6yQfN4=; b=d7tbL1qv7HBEykNUNUOHt3PSk0EQJU5/UpMjr9VZzMCycJj9KUCB2nZwVH9E8iHG0P eM/pNVQ1eMCe7eH35SQi0dnynatY7VE3yheNNDe5luMVLAXVoWSfZDxKHBhuqs4j6W9w nDlZDv5HQtODeyJHxoaKu1b6J6j5bI18XKKDtPVxjFxR1N0J7WfVvJ5JTH6ovv9vr/Gf Cm+jLl39Y0062bpT7bIfLdYpCDLp5GvgBCTewEntYg/ogXTa9tdmK9GKBWo/fYsjw+VN C8/A9TWagF+L7X5XOwgT1UbQ0E7FOSKp+QWg9+4eikP5h6YwXbT0Bfc/r30ktzApffTL Mi6Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=MmIWB4RR; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g11-20020a1709065d0b00b007316cc1113asi3773484ejt.910.2022.08.09.21.38.29; Tue, 09 Aug 2022 21:38:54 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=MmIWB4RR; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230119AbiHJEHx (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 10 Aug 2022 00:07:53 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35852 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231192AbiHJEHB (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2022 00:07:01 -0400 Received: from mail-vs1-xe32.google.com (mail-vs1-xe32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e32]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D6F380F53 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 21:06:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-xe32.google.com with SMTP id 66so13959954vse.4 for ; Tue, 09 Aug 2022 21:06:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc; bh=qZm1fXghi6IF6e55IsqmlhKKwI7Wy4DqK9Waf6yQfN4=; b=MmIWB4RRpjdnR6kMlp6sNc8gWwxl2vsFSpKPuHg0Qy84HCHNtgsoeLFA2cR6JH/cMn nfSGlpH+8ny8oIru9QhKwYUpTilYDSV2AO1+qJmXUrgMSCjAEAvLD1UI71I2CCDoZ4P8 k+MB1H1UywZsz8afKbok7yD0xUV5uOwTW/X4S0Zm0Dv3WcOd6IYghA53gFdVxozGoqzi 85CLZ0eBdy6yVwlAV19jT14a2iL5VaqxRyJLPr5OkHP8yEiQGG8pExYhnj0vvWzg4lP8 vlar8cAwjTTa/WoVTt6iwkRRkhkM7PxJDpKW9l/+ENXFw0PfX5zvP8BeKv9Xn4cCXBff UXmw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=qZm1fXghi6IF6e55IsqmlhKKwI7Wy4DqK9Waf6yQfN4=; b=KYehJwISUY5SLm9mIpbUhDJ5w1M+OLpGOEKl/ScZOs7Xc+bfFFxto1Ic6wUaJpFDYG XXc/Jww5FLd4yP/i4tbw22BB5YzDSL1pHKdokJobyPZK8kJxAcC8hsLbL/riGBnpwtxY pL3ax5thZLV2mVwOp20xCQX8Pc53R00yPXVlOuhkdtWsS6HG1AoEbnmKmKxJOzqm8kfz HFpzauBp5PsUP/uhQ8KQ41fO3KvTuxtL7gzNhzULFTLGq8bVQqmWGmsylhDitTfG8WsT zrTeLUJOx+ZMppH9X6l9yieKV+xyA9J6Dn3XWj1f/Qg8e5F1eemBW9lnSajvqwVe/2KP euGA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo14eE3noM270xhH+fu0DtQAKJSgRrbkX6hhgw1OqLdMeMr+A8Zf Ynt0RbT3/YUHJZv7NwSipTBROr9LorIE9iy7rV5F5Q== X-Received: by 2002:a67:d21b:0:b0:388:4e12:eff9 with SMTP id y27-20020a67d21b000000b003884e12eff9mr10881883vsi.35.1660104398135; Tue, 09 Aug 2022 21:06:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <30d8882efedea697da20c27563050008d1569b9e.1660068429.git.sander@svanheule.net> In-Reply-To: <30d8882efedea697da20c27563050008d1569b9e.1660068429.git.sander@svanheule.net> From: David Gow Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 12:06:27 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] lib/test_cpumask: drop cpu_possible_mask full test To: Sander Vanheule Cc: Yury Norov , Andy Shevchenko , Rasmus Villemoes , Linux Kernel Mailing List , =?UTF-8?B?TWHDrXJhIENhbmFs?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL,USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 2:09 AM Sander Vanheule wrot= e: > > cpu_possible_mask is not necessarily completely filled. That means > running a check on cpumask_full() doesn't make sense, so drop the test. > > Fixes: c41e8866c28c ("lib/test: introduce cpumask KUnit test suite") > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/346cb279-8e75-24b0-7d12-9803f2b41c73@r= iseup.net/ > Reported-by: Ma=C3=ADra Canal > Signed-off-by: Sander Vanheule > Cc: David Gow > --- Looks good to me. It'd maybe be worth noting _why_ cpu_possible_mask is not always filled (i.e., that the number of available CPUs might not match the maximum number of CPUs the kernel is built to support), but it's probably not worth doing a new version of the patch series just for that. Reviewed-by: David Gow Cheers, -- David > lib/test_cpumask.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/lib/test_cpumask.c b/lib/test_cpumask.c > index a31a1622f1f6..4ebf9f5805f3 100644 > --- a/lib/test_cpumask.c > +++ b/lib/test_cpumask.c > @@ -54,7 +54,6 @@ static cpumask_t mask_all; > static void test_cpumask_weight(struct kunit *test) > { > KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, cpumask_empty(&mask_empty)); > - KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, cpumask_full(cpu_possible_mask)); > KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, cpumask_full(&mask_all)); > > KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, cpumask_weight(&mask_empty)); > -- > 2.37.1 >