On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 06:06:41PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 10:13:28AM -0500, Yury Norov wrote: > > Because it's related to bitmap API usage and has been revealed after > > some work in bitmaps. > > So first of all, that "fix" needs to explain what exactly it is fixing. > Not "it fixes this and that warning" but why the input arg to > cpumask_next() cannot be nr_cpu_ids because... yadda yadda... Hi Boris, I didn't realize you were still looking for improvements to the commit message for this patch. I could add something like, The valid cpumask range is [0, nr_cpu_ids) and cpumask_next() always returns a CPU ID greater than its input, which results in its input range being [-1, nr_cpu_ids - 1). Ensure showing CPU info avoids triggering error conditions in cpumask_next() by stopping its loop over CPUs when its input would be invalid. Thanks, drew > > > And because nobody else cares. > > Why do you assume that? > > > If you're willing to move it yourself please go ahead. > > If it fixes a real issue, we are taking it. And pls note that x86 > patches go through the tip tree. > > Thx. > > -- > Regards/Gruss, > Boris. > > https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
