linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] i386: mce cleanup part1: functional change

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 9 Oct 2007 18:32:30 +0200
From:	Oleg Verych <olecom@...wer.upol.cz>
To:	Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@....com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] i386: mce cleanup part1: functional change

On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 06:06:05PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > cpu_has() returns int,
> > but would it be better to have something like
> > 
> >   	if (!mce_disabled &&
> > 	    !(c->x86_capability & (X86_FEATURE_MCA | X86_FEATURE_MCE)) {
> > 		printk(KERN_INFO "CPU%i: No machine check support available\n",
> > 			smp_processor_id());
> 
> This looks complicated and is harder to read. Its exactly the purpose of the
> cpu_has() macro to avoid such constructs.

It is done via test_bit(), which is designed for IO access with all that
`const volatile' stuff, 2 x unnecessary, can't be optimized here (IMHO).
____
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/