linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] PAD helper for native and paravirt platform

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: <20120217190631.GA20584@phenom.dumpdata.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:06:31 -0500
From:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To:	"Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@...el.com>
Cc:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>,
	"keir.xen@...il.com" <keir.xen@...il.com>,
	"Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
	Kerneldevelopment list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PAD helper for native and paravirt platform

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 05:59:56PM +0000, Liu, Jinsong wrote:
> >> 
> >> +static inline int __acpi_pad_init(void)
> >> +{
> >> +	return PVOP_CALL0(int, pv_pad_ops.acpi_pad_init); +}
> >> +
> >> +static inline void __acpi_pad_exit(void)
> >> +{
> >> +	PVOP_VCALL0(pv_pad_ops.acpi_pad_exit);
> >> +}
> > 
> > With this you, aiui, you aim at getting the calls patched. Are the
> > callers of this really on performance critical paths? If not, the
> > simpler approach of having an ops structure the fields of which get
> > overwritten by 
> > Xen initialization would seem a more appropriate approach.
> > 
> 
> Yes, I agree. I code in this way just want to keep same coding style as other pv functions of paravirt.h.
> I update the patch w/ a simpler approach, and will post later.
> Of course, we need Konrad's comments.

The thing is that the paravirt approach also impacts lguests. While I don't
think your patch will affect it, it just doesn't seem like the right place.

It seems that a more general approach, like the x86 one would be appropiate.
Or since this is ACPI related - perhaps in the drivers/acpi/osl.c ? - That is
all "OS dependent functions" and seem proper?

--
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/