linux-kernel - Re: [Pv-drivers] [PATCH 12/12] VMCI: Some header and config files.

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:	Mon, 26 Nov 2012 16:45:58 -0800
From:	Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...are.com>
To:	pv-drivers@...are.com
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Pv-drivers] [PATCH 12/12] VMCI: Some header and config files.

On Monday, November 26, 2012 04:32:39 PM Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:23:57PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Hi Greg,
> > 
> > For some reason it still didn't go through to our corporate mail server
> > but I see it on LKML.
> 
> Good.
> 
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:03:04PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 10:43:03AM -0800, George Zhang wrote:
> > > > +static inline struct vmci_handle VMCI_MAKE_HANDLE(vmci_id cid,
> > > > vmci_id rid) +{
> > > > +	struct vmci_handle h;
> > > > +	h.context = cid;
> > > > +	h.resource = rid;
> > > > +	return h;
> > > > +}
> > > 
> > > You return a structure on the stack that just went away?  Yeah, I know
> > > it's an inline, but come on, that's not ok.
> > 
> > This is certainly OK even if it is not inline, we return the _value_,
> > not the pointer to the stacki memory. And yes, the structure is 64 bit
> > value so it is returned in registers.
> 
> Even on a 32bit processor? 

I thought it would, but it looks like it won't. Maybe we'll just switch it
to a macro with C99 style initializators to keep the same semantic but
avoid the question.

> Also, you already have another function that
> does this same thing, so having 2 functions in the same patch seems odd,
> right?

Yes, you can say that it is probably a bit excessive.

OK, now that we are on the same page we'll go and fix the issues.

Thanks,
Dmitry
--
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/