linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 1/8] video: tegra: Add nvhost driver

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, 03 Dec 2012 12:23:32 -0700
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
CC:	Terje Bergström <tbergstrom@...dia.com>,
	"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
	"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/8] video: tegra: Add nvhost driver

On 12/01/2012 07:58 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 01:31:02PM +0200, Terje Bergström wrote:
...
>> I was thinking of definitions like this:
>> 
>> static inline u32 host1x_sync_cfpeek_ctrl_cfpeek_addr_f(u32 v) { 
>> return (v & 0x1ff) << 0; }
>> 
>> versus
>> 
>> #define host1x_sync_cfpeek_ctrl_cfpeek_addr_f(v) ((v) >> 16) &
>> 0x3ff
>> 
>> Both of these produce the same machine code and have same usage,
>> but the latter has type checking and code coverage analysis and
>> the former is (in my eyes) clearer. In both of these cases the
>> usage is like this:
>> 
>> writel(host1x_sync_cfpeek_ctrl_cfpeek_ena_f(1) |
>> host1x_sync_cfpeek_ctrl_cfpeek_channr_f(chid) |
>> host1x_sync_cfpeek_ctrl_cfpeek_addr_f(rd_ptr), m->sync_aperture +
>> host1x_sync_cfpeek_ctrl_r());
> 
> Again there's no precedent for doing this with static inline
> functions. You can do the same with macros. Type checking isn't an
> issue in these cases since we're talking about bitfields for which
> no proper type exists.

I suspect the inline functions could encode signed-vs-unsigned fields,
perhaps catch u8 variables when they should have been u32, etc.?
--
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/