lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH linux-next v3 1/2] irq: Add CPU mask affinity hint
On Fri, 30 Apr 2010, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Apr 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 13:23 -0700, Peter P Waskiewicz Jr wrote:
>>> +int irq_register_affinity_hint(unsigned int irq, const struct cpumask *m)
>>> +{
>>> + struct irq_desc *desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
>>> + unsigned long flags;
>>> +
>>> + if (!desc)
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>
>> Is it possible for irq_to_desc(irq) to be NULL? This function already
>> assumes that the caller 'owns' the IRQ.
>
> Oh come on. Driver writers get everything wrong and not checking on an
> invalid irq number is better than crashing :)
>
>>> +static int irq_affinity_hint_proc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>>> +{
>>> + struct irq_desc *desc = irq_to_desc((long)m->private);
>>> + unsigned long flags;
>>> + cpumask_var_t mask;
>>> + int ret = -EINVAL;
>>
>> I don't think this should be returning -EINVAL if the affinity hint is
>> missing. That means 'invalid argument', but there is nothing invalid
>> about trying to read() the corresponding file. The file should simply
>> be empty if there is no hint. (Actually it might be better if it didn't
>> appear at all, but that would be a pain to implement.)
>
> I agree that -EINVAL is not really a good match.
>
> How about just returning CPU_MASK_ALL if desc->affinity_hint is not
> set ?

That seems reasonable to me.

cheers,
-PJ


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-04-30 23:21    [W:0.050 / U:0.448 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site