Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] x86, acpi, cpu-hotplug: Introduce apicid_to_cpuid[] array to store persistent cpuid <-> apicid mapping.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 05:52:09PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
> >>+static int allocate_logical_cpuid(int apicid)
> >>+{
> >>+	int i;
> >>+
> >>+	/*
> >>+	 * cpuid <-> apicid mapping is persistent, so when a cpu is up,
> >>+	 * check if the kernel has allocated a cpuid for it.
> >>+	 */
> >>+	for (i = 0; i < max_logical_cpuid; i++) {
> >>+		if (cpuid_to_apicid[i] == apicid)
> >>+			return i;
> >>+	}
> >>+
> >>+	/* Allocate a new cpuid. */
> >>+	if (max_logical_cpuid >= nr_cpu_ids) {
> >>+		WARN_ONCE(1, "Only %d processors supported."
> >>+			     "Processor %d/0x%x and the rest are ignored.\n",
> >>+			     nr_cpu_ids - 1, max_logical_cpuid, apicid);
> >>+		return -1;
> >>+	}
> >So, the original code didn't have this failure mode, why is this
> >different for the new code?
> 
> It is not different. Since max_logical_cpuid is new, this is ensure it won't
> go beyond NR_CPUS.

If the above condition can happen, the original code should have had a
similar check as above, right?  Sure, max_logical_cpuid is a new thing
but that doesn't seem to change whether the above condition can happen
or not, no?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux