Development discussion of WireGuard
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vernon Yang <vernon2gm@gmail.com>
To: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, tytso@mit.edu, Jason@zx2c4.com,
	davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
	pabeni@redhat.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
	martin.petersen@oracle.com, yury.norov@gmail.com,
	andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk,
	james.smart@broadcom.com, dick.kennedy@broadcom.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	Vernon Yang <vernon2gm@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/4] scsi: lpfc: fix lpfc_cpu_affinity_check() if no further cpus set
Date: Tue,  7 Mar 2023 05:03:11 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230306210312.2614988-4-vernon2gm@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230306210312.2614988-1-vernon2gm@gmail.com>

When cpumask_next() the return value is greater than or equal to
nr_cpu_ids, it indicates invalid.

Before commit 596ff4a09b89 ("cpumask: re-introduce constant-sized cpumask
optimizations"), when cpumask_next() returned an invalid cpu, the driver
used the judgment equal to nr_cpu_ids to indicate the invalid cpu, so it
happened to work normally, but this is the wrong approach.

After commit 596ff4a09b89 ("cpumask: re-introduce constant-sized cpumask
optimizations"), these incorrect practices actively buggy, so fix it to
correctly.

Signed-off-by: Vernon Yang <vernon2gm@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++-------------------
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c
index 61958a24a43d..acfffdbe9ba1 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_init.c
@@ -12473,6 +12473,16 @@ lpfc_hba_eq_hdl_array_init(struct lpfc_hba *phba)
 	}
 }
 
+static inline int lpfc_next_present_cpu(int n, int first_cpu)
+{
+	n = cpumask_next(n, cpu_present_mask);
+
+	if (n >= nr_cpu_ids)
+		n = first_cpu;
+
+	return n;
+}
+
 /**
  * lpfc_cpu_affinity_check - Check vector CPU affinity mappings
  * @phba: pointer to lpfc hba data structure.
@@ -12561,10 +12571,8 @@ lpfc_cpu_affinity_check(struct lpfc_hba *phba, int vectors)
 				    (new_cpup->eq != LPFC_VECTOR_MAP_EMPTY) &&
 				    (new_cpup->phys_id == cpup->phys_id))
 					goto found_same;
-				new_cpu = cpumask_next(
-					new_cpu, cpu_present_mask);
-				if (new_cpu == nr_cpumask_bits)
-					new_cpu = first_cpu;
+
+				new_cpu = lpfc_next_present_cpu(new_cpu, first_cpu);
 			}
 			/* At this point, we leave the CPU as unassigned */
 			continue;
@@ -12576,9 +12584,7 @@ lpfc_cpu_affinity_check(struct lpfc_hba *phba, int vectors)
 			 * chance of having multiple unassigned CPU entries
 			 * selecting the same IRQ.
 			 */
-			start_cpu = cpumask_next(new_cpu, cpu_present_mask);
-			if (start_cpu == nr_cpumask_bits)
-				start_cpu = first_cpu;
+			start_cpu = lpfc_next_present_cpu(new_cpu, first_cpu);
 
 			lpfc_printf_log(phba, KERN_INFO, LOG_INIT,
 					"3337 Set Affinity: CPU %d "
@@ -12611,10 +12617,8 @@ lpfc_cpu_affinity_check(struct lpfc_hba *phba, int vectors)
 				if (!(new_cpup->flag & LPFC_CPU_MAP_UNASSIGN) &&
 				    (new_cpup->eq != LPFC_VECTOR_MAP_EMPTY))
 					goto found_any;
-				new_cpu = cpumask_next(
-					new_cpu, cpu_present_mask);
-				if (new_cpu == nr_cpumask_bits)
-					new_cpu = first_cpu;
+
+				new_cpu = lpfc_next_present_cpu(new_cpu, first_cpu);
 			}
 			/* We should never leave an entry unassigned */
 			lpfc_printf_log(phba, KERN_ERR, LOG_INIT,
@@ -12630,9 +12634,7 @@ lpfc_cpu_affinity_check(struct lpfc_hba *phba, int vectors)
 			 * chance of having multiple unassigned CPU entries
 			 * selecting the same IRQ.
 			 */
-			start_cpu = cpumask_next(new_cpu, cpu_present_mask);
-			if (start_cpu == nr_cpumask_bits)
-				start_cpu = first_cpu;
+			start_cpu = lpfc_next_present_cpu(new_cpu, first_cpu);
 
 			lpfc_printf_log(phba, KERN_INFO, LOG_INIT,
 					"3338 Set Affinity: CPU %d "
@@ -12703,9 +12705,8 @@ lpfc_cpu_affinity_check(struct lpfc_hba *phba, int vectors)
 			    new_cpup->core_id == cpup->core_id) {
 				goto found_hdwq;
 			}
-			new_cpu = cpumask_next(new_cpu, cpu_present_mask);
-			if (new_cpu == nr_cpumask_bits)
-				new_cpu = first_cpu;
+
+			new_cpu = lpfc_next_present_cpu(new_cpu, first_cpu);
 		}
 
 		/* If we can't match both phys_id and core_id,
@@ -12718,9 +12719,7 @@ lpfc_cpu_affinity_check(struct lpfc_hba *phba, int vectors)
 			    new_cpup->phys_id == cpup->phys_id)
 				goto found_hdwq;
 
-			new_cpu = cpumask_next(new_cpu, cpu_present_mask);
-			if (new_cpu == nr_cpumask_bits)
-				new_cpu = first_cpu;
+			new_cpu = lpfc_next_present_cpu(new_cpu, first_cpu);
 		}
 
 		/* Otherwise just round robin on cfg_hdw_queue */
@@ -12729,9 +12728,7 @@ lpfc_cpu_affinity_check(struct lpfc_hba *phba, int vectors)
 		goto logit;
  found_hdwq:
 		/* We found an available entry, copy the IRQ info */
-		start_cpu = cpumask_next(new_cpu, cpu_present_mask);
-		if (start_cpu == nr_cpumask_bits)
-			start_cpu = first_cpu;
+		start_cpu = lpfc_next_present_cpu(new_cpu, first_cpu);
 		cpup->hdwq = new_cpup->hdwq;
  logit:
 		lpfc_printf_log(phba, KERN_INFO, LOG_INIT,
-- 
2.34.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-03-07  0:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-03-06 21:03 [PATCH v2 0/4] fix call cpumask_next() " Vernon Yang
2023-03-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] random: fix try_to_generate_entropy() " Vernon Yang
2023-03-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] wireguard: fix wg_cpumask_choose_online() " Vernon Yang
2023-03-06 21:03 ` Vernon Yang [this message]
2023-03-08  0:40   ` [PATCH v2 3/4] scsi: lpfc: fix lpfc_cpu_affinity_check() " Justin Tee
2023-03-06 21:03 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] scsi: lpfc: fix lpfc_nvmet_setup_io_context() " Vernon Yang

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20230306210312.2614988-4-vernon2gm@gmail.com \
    --to=vernon2gm@gmail.com \
    --cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dick.kennedy@broadcom.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=james.smart@broadcom.com \
    --cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com \
    --cc=yury.norov@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).