On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 10:54:48AM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote: > On 19/04/23 22:19, Yury Norov wrote: > > +/** > > + * for_each_numa_cpu - iterate over cpus in increasing order taking into account > > + * NUMA distances from a given node. > > + * @cpu: the (optionally unsigned) integer iterator > > + * @hop: the iterator variable, must be initialized to a desired minimal hop. > > + * @node: the NUMA node to start the search from. > > + * @mask: the cpumask pointer > > + * > > + * Requires rcu_lock to be held. > > + */ > > +#define for_each_numa_cpu(cpu, hop, node, mask) \ > > + for ((cpu) = 0, (hop) = 0; \ > > + (cpu) = sched_numa_find_next_cpu((mask), (cpu), (node), &(hop)),\ > > + (cpu) < nr_cpu_ids; \ > > + (cpu)++) > > + > > I think we can keep sched_numa_find_next_cpu() as-is, but could we make > that macro use cpu_possible_mask by default? We can always add a variant > if/when we need to feed in a different mask. As mentioned in discussion to the driver's patch, all that numa things imply only online CPUs, so cpu_possible_mask may mislead to some extent. Anyways, can you elaborate what you exactly want? Like this? #define for_each_numa_online_cpu(cpu, hop, node) \ for_each_numa_cpu(cpu, hop, node, cpu_online_mask)