linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 3/5] xen: Put EFI machinery in place

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, 19 May 2014 14:39:00 +0100
From:	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
To:	Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>
CC:	<linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<x86@...nel.org>, <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
	<mjg59@...f.ucam.org>, <jeremy@...p.org>, <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
	<ian.campbell@...rix.com>, <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	<mingo@...hat.com>, <david.vrabel@...rix.com>, <jbeulich@...e.com>,
	<hpa@...or.com>, <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	<tglx@...utronix.de>, <eshelton@...ox.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 3/5] xen: Put EFI machinery in place

On 16/05/14 21:41, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> @@ -0,0 +1,374 @@
> +/*
> + * EFI support for Xen.
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 1999 VA Linux Systems
> + * Copyright (C) 1999 Walt Drummond <drummond@...inux.com>
> + * Copyright (C) 1999-2002 Hewlett-Packard Co.
> + *	David Mosberger-Tang <davidm@....hp.com>
> + *	Stephane Eranian <eranian@....hp.com>
> + * Copyright (C) 2005-2008 Intel Co.
> + *	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
> + *	Bibo Mao <bibo.mao@...el.com>
> + *	Chandramouli Narayanan <mouli@...ux.intel.com>
> + *	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
> + * Copyright (C) 2011 Novell Co.
> + *	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
> + * Copyright (C) 2011-2012 Oracle Co.
> + *	Liang Tang <liang.tang@...cle.com>
> + * Copyright (c) 2014 Daniel Kiper, Oracle Corporation
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/bug.h>
> +#include <linux/efi.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/string.h>
> +
> +#include <xen/interface/xen.h>
> +#include <xen/interface/platform.h>
> +
> +#include <asm/xen/hypercall.h>
> +
> +#define call (op.u.efi_runtime_call)

I think not.

> +#define DECLARE_CALL(what) \
> +	struct xen_platform_op op; \
> +	op.cmd = XENPF_efi_runtime_call; \
> +	call.function = XEN_EFI_##what; \
> +	call.misc = 0

Macros like this which explicitly create local variable with implicit
names are evil when reading code.

If you want to do initialisation like this, then at least do something like:

#define INIT_EFI_CALL(what) \
{ .cmd = XENPF_efi_runtime_call, \
   .u.efi_runtime_call.function = XEN_EFI_##what, \
   .u.efi_runtime_call.misc = 0 }

And use it as:

struct xen_platform_op op = INIT_EFI_CALL(foo);

~Andrew
--
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/