On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 03:10:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 21:39:25 +0200 "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On my "Intel(R) Xeon(R) W-2135 CPU @ 3.70GHz" system(12 CPUs)
> > i get the warning from the compiler about frame size:
> >
> > <snip>
> > warning: the frame size of 1096 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes
> > [-Wframe-larger-than=]
> > <snip>
> >
> > the size of cpumask_t depends on number of CPUs, therefore just
> > make use of cpumask_of() in set_cpus_allowed_ptr() as a second
> > argument.
> >
> > ...
> L
> > --- a/lib/test_vmalloc.c
> > +++ b/lib/test_vmalloc.c
> > @@ -383,14 +383,14 @@ static void shuffle_array(int *arr, int n)
> > static int test_func(void *private)
> > {
> > struct test_driver *t = private;
> > - cpumask_t newmask = CPU_MASK_NONE;
> > int random_array[ARRAY_SIZE(test_case_array)];
> > int index, i, j, ret;
> > ktime_t kt;
> > u64 delta;
> >
> > - cpumask_set_cpu(t->cpu, &newmask);
> > - set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, &newmask);
> > + ret = set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, cpumask_of(t->cpu));
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + pr_err("Failed to set affinity to %d CPU\n", t->cpu);
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(test_case_array); i++)
> > random_array[i] = i;
>
> lgtm.
>
> While we're in there...
>
>
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: lib/test_vmalloc.c:test_func(): eliminate local `ret'
>
> Local 'ret' is unneeded and was poorly named: the variable `ret' generally
> means the "the value which this function will return".
>
> Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx>
> Cc: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> lib/test_vmalloc.c | 8 +++-----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/lib/test_vmalloc.c~a
> +++ a/lib/test_vmalloc.c
> @@ -384,12 +384,11 @@ static int test_func(void *private)
> {
> struct test_driver *t = private;
> int random_array[ARRAY_SIZE(test_case_array)];
> - int index, i, j, ret;
> + int index, i, j;
> ktime_t kt;
> u64 delta;
>
> - ret = set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, cpumask_of(t->cpu));
> - if (ret < 0)
> + if (set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, cpumask_of(t->cpu)) < 0)
> pr_err("Failed to set affinity to %d CPU\n", t->cpu);
>
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(test_case_array); i++)
> @@ -415,8 +414,7 @@ static int test_func(void *private)
>
> kt = ktime_get();
> for (j = 0; j < test_repeat_count; j++) {
> - ret = test_case_array[index].test_func();
> - if (!ret)
> + if (!test_case_array[index].test_func())
> per_cpu_test_data[t->cpu][index].test_passed++;
> else
> per_cpu_test_data[t->cpu][index].test_failed++;
> _
>
Agree with your slight update.
Thank you!
--
Vlad Rezki
