linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/2] xen-pciback: drop rom

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 6 Jun 2016 10:35:56 -0400
From:	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
Cc:	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Juergen Gross <JGross@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/2] xen-pciback: drop rom_init()

On 06/06/2016 09:54 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 06.06.16 at 15:09, <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com> wrote:
>> On 06/06/2016 04:47 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> It's identical to bar_init() now.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
>>> ---
>>> I'm sorry for this 3/2 - I only now noticed that this additional
>>> simplification is now possible.
>> I wonder whether we should also move content of read_dev_bar() into
>> bar_init(). Especially given that it's not really reading a BAR but
>> rather initializing the stashed value.
> I had considered that too, but then thought the splitting out of
> that logic could as well stay. If we were to do that, I'd in fact
> prefer merging patches 2 and 3 (plus this additional adjustment).

If you could do that it would be great. (Again, mostly because I think
the name is misleading and renaming it to something like dev_bar_init()
would also not be good since we already have bar_init()).

Thanks.
-boris