linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] intel_txt: to fix build errors of CONFIG_ACPI

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]

Message-ID: <4A8437CF.7060007@zytor.com>
Date:	Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:57:03 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	"Wang, Shane" <shane.wang@...el.com>,
	"Cihula, Joseph" <joseph.cihula@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"arjan@...ux.intel.com" <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	"andi@...stfloor.org" <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"chrisw@...s-sol.org" <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	"jmorris@...ei.org" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	"jbeulich@...ell.com" <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
	"peterm@...hat.com" <peterm@...hat.com>,
	"Wei, Gang" <gang.wei@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] intel_txt: to fix build errors of CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP

On 08/13/2009 08:46 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
>> Consider the attached instead patch, which abstracts some of the 
>> (way more complex than it should be) open-coded stuff and 
>> therefore makes it stick out less.
> 
> it's better, but why not put these:
> 
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP
>>  	tboot->acpi_sinfo.kernel_s3_resume_vector = acpi_wakeup_address;
>> +#endif
> 
> into a helper inline in a header file and let the #ifdefs be there, 
> or something like that. That way the .c file stays readable.
> 

That would probably be a good thing, *but* I think that that is more
cleaner done as a pass over the entire ACPI code and its dependencies.

acpi_wakeup_address is arguably wrong interface, in the first place:
it's exported as a physical address, but we actually need the virtual
address in several places, and so there is a lot of back-and-forth (if
we had the va interface this wouldn't be the only place in the case
which would be cleaner.)  However, again, this is an ACPI-global issue.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/