sorry, please drop this patch.
I should replace NR_CPUS with nr_cpu_ids, i will resend it
-R
On 6/15/18, Li RongQing <lirongq...@baidu.com> wrote:
> The default NR_CPUS can be very large, but actual possible nr_cpu_ids
> usually is very small. For some x86 distribution, the NR_CPUS is 8192
> and nr_cpu_ids is 4.
>
> when xfrm_init is running, num_possible_cpus() should work
>
> Signed-off-by: Li RongQing <lirongq...@baidu.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Li <wangl...@baidu.com>
> ---
> net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> index 40b54cc64243..cbb862463cbd 100644
> --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> @@ -2988,12 +2988,13 @@ static struct pernet_operations __net_initdata
> xfrm_net_ops = {
> void __init xfrm_init(void)
> {
> int i;
> + unsigned int nr_cpus = num_possible_cpus();
>
> - xfrm_pcpu_work = kmalloc_array(NR_CPUS, sizeof(*xfrm_pcpu_work),
> + xfrm_pcpu_work = kmalloc_array(nr_cpus, sizeof(*xfrm_pcpu_work),
> GFP_KERNEL);
> BUG_ON(!xfrm_pcpu_work);
>
> - for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++)
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_cpus; i++)
> INIT_WORK(&xfrm_pcpu_work[i], xfrm_pcpu_work_fn);
>
> register_pernet_subsys(&xfrm_net_ops);
> --
> 2.16.2
>
>
