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;
From:   Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
        Gal Pressman <gal@nvidia.com>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@nvidia.com>,
        Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] sched/topology: Introduce for_each_numa_hop_mask()
In-Reply-To: <Y1KboXN0f8dLjqit@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20221021121927.2893692-1-vschneid@redhat.com>
 <20221021121927.2893692-3-vschneid@redhat.com>
 <Y1KboXN0f8dLjqit@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Oct 2022 14:57:01 +0100
Message-ID: <xhsmhlep9wa8i.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On 21/10/22 16:16, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 01:19:26PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>> The recently introduced sched_numa_hop_mask() exposes cpumasks of CPUs
>> reachable within a given distance budget, wrap the logic for iterating over
>> all (distance, mask) values inside an iterator macro.
>
> ...
>
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
>> -extern const struct cpumask *sched_numa_hop_mask(int node, int hops);
>> +extern const struct cpumask *sched_numa_hop_mask(unsigned int node, unsigned int hops);
>>  #else
>> -static inline const struct cpumask *sched_numa_hop_mask(int node, int hops)
>> +static inline const struct cpumask *
>> +sched_numa_hop_mask(unsigned int node, unsigned int hops)
>>  {
>> -	if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE && !hops)
>> -		return cpu_online_mask;
>> -
>>      return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
>>  }
>>  #endif	/* CONFIG_NUMA */
>
> I didn't get how the above two changes are related to the 3rd one which
> introduces a for_each type of macro.
>
> If you need change int --> unsigned int, perhaps it can be done in a separate
> patch.
>
> The change inside inliner I dunno about. Not an expert.
>

That's a rebase fail, this should all be in the first patch, my bad.