linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 05/16] x86/efi: Get entropy through EFI random number generator protocol

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: <20150731160536.GH2067@linux-rxt1.site>
Date:	Sat, 1 Aug 2015 00:05:36 +0800
From:	joeyli <jlee@...e.com>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>
Cc:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	"Lee, Chun-Yi" <joeyli.kernel@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>,
	Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.cz>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/16] x86/efi: Get entropy through EFI random number
 generator protocol

On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 01:01:18PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 17:58 +0800, joeyli wrote:
> > > 
> > > Can you do something to avoid each function having two very similar
> > > versions of these functions?
> > >
> > 
> > They are similar but I want follow the style in eboot.c.
> > On the other hand, it's earlier to locate problem on 32-bit or 64-bit EFI.
> > 
> > So, I will keep the above codes.
> 
> FWIW, I think that's fine. I would happily accept a patch to cleanup the
> duplication, but I don't think that needs to be a prerequisite for this
> support.
> 
> I've no problem with the duplication right now.
>

Thanks
 
> > > 
> > > > --- a/include/linux/efi.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/efi.h
> > > > @@ -427,6 +427,16 @@ typedef struct {
> > > >  #define EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_VGA_PALETTE_IO_16 0x20000
> > > >  #define EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_VGA_IO_16 0x40000
> > > >  
> > > > +typedef struct {
> > > > +	u32 get_info;
> > > > +	u32 get_rng;
> > > > +} efi_rng_protocol_32;
> > > > +
> > > > +typedef struct {
> > > > +	u64 get_info;
> > > > +	u64 get_rng;
> > > > +} efi_rng_protocol_64;
> > > 
> > > We don't typedef structs usually...
> > > 
> > > Make it union so you can have just one
> > >
> > 
> > I want to follow the style as efi_pci_io_protocolxxx in efi.h.
> > So I will keep it.
> 
> Yeah, consistency is better here than sticking with the general Linux
> coding style rules.
> 
> > > > +	switch (status) {
> > > > +	case EFI_SUCCESS:
> > > > +		str = "EFI_SUCCESS";
> > > > +		break;
> > > 
> > > Can you use macros to reduce code duplication here?
> > > 									Pavel
> > I will try to reduce duplicate code.
> 
> Take a look at __stringify().
>

Thanks for suggestion, I will look at it.

Joey Lee
--
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/