MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230306160651.2016767-1-vernon2gm@gmail.com> <20230306160651.2016767-6-vernon2gm@gmail.com>
 <ZAYXJ2E+JHcp2kD/@yury-laptop>
In-Reply-To: <ZAYXJ2E+JHcp2kD/@yury-laptop>
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 Mar 2023 17:44:41 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHmME9r_JXNCVVCNxZRQkafA=eOOu5k0+AweRDor3tNu283bdg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] cpumask: fix comment of cpumask_xxx
To:     Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
Cc:     Vernon Yang <vernon2gm@gmail.com>, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        tytso@mit.edu, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com,
        kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
        martin.petersen@oracle.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com,
        linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, james.smart@broadcom.com,
        dick.kennedy@broadcom.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 5:39=E2=80=AFPM Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> wr=
ote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 12:06:51AM +0800, Vernon Yang wrote:
> > After commit 596ff4a09b89 ("cpumask: re-introduce constant-sized cpumas=
k
> > optimizations"), the cpumask size is divided into three different case,
> > so fix comment of cpumask_xxx correctly.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vernon Yang <vernon2gm@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/cpumask.h | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> >  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/cpumask.h b/include/linux/cpumask.h
> > index 8fbe76607965..248bdb1c50dc 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/cpumask.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/cpumask.h
> > @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ static __always_inline unsigned int cpumask_check(u=
nsigned int cpu)
> >   * cpumask_first - get the first cpu in a cpumask
> >   * @srcp: the cpumask pointer
> >   *
> > - * Returns >=3D nr_cpu_ids if no cpus set.
> > + * Returns >=3D small_cpumask_bits if no cpus set.
>
> There's no such thing like small_cpumask_bits. Here and everywhere,
> nr_cpu_ids must be used.
>
> Actually, before 596ff4a09b89 nr_cpumask_bits was deprecated, and it
> must be like that for all users even now.
>
> nr_cpumask_bits must be considered as internal cpumask parameter and
> never referenced outside of cpumask code.

What's the right thing I should do, then, for wireguard's usage and
for random.c's usage? It sounds like you object to this patchset, but
if the problem is real, it sounds like I should at least fix the two
cases I maintain. What's the right check?

Jason