Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-130206-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 09:39:01 -0700
From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
To: Dawei Li <dawei.li@shingroup.cn>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, will@kernel.org,
	linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, xueshuai@linux.alibaba.com,
	renyu.zj@linux.alibaba.com, yangyicong@hisilicon.com,
	jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, andersson@kernel.org,
	konrad.dybcio@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] perf: Avoid placing cpumask var on stack
Message-ID: <Zg2GJdio2YSAkqZr@yury-ThinkPad>
References: <20240403125109.2054881-1-dawei.li@shingroup.cn>
 <Zg1qgxqrEi3sX3CA@FVFF77S0Q05N>
 <5BCB924A8FA6320A+Zg1/xw9C493rZ868@centos8>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5BCB924A8FA6320A+Zg1/xw9C493rZ868@centos8>

On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 12:11:51AM +0800, Dawei Li wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 03:41:07PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 08:50:59PM +0800, Dawei Li wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > > This is v2 of [1] and [2] which basically eliminate cpumask var allocation
> > > on stack for perf subsystem.
> > > 
> > > Change since v1:
> > > - Change from dynamic allocation to a temporary var free helper:
> > >   cpumask_any_and_but().	[Mark]
> > > 
> > > - Some minor coding style improvements, reverse chrismas tree e.g.
> > > 
> > > - For cpumask_any_and_but() itself:
> > >   - Moved to cpumask.h, just like other helpers.
> > >   - Return value converted to unsigned int.
> > >   - Remove EXPORT_SYMBOL, for obvious reason.
> > 
> > Thanks for this!
> > 
> > The logic all looks good; if you can spin a v3 with the updated commit messages
> > I reckon we can queue this up shortly.
> 
> Thanks for review.
> 
> v3 respinned:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240403155950.2068109-1-dawei.li@shingroup.cn/
> 
> If it's going through perf tree, do we need Acked-by from bitmap
> maintainers for patch[1]?

There's only one bitmap-related patch, so I agree - the series should
go through Mark's tree. I acked 1st patch in v3. Please go ahead.

Thanks,
Yury