linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kvm: x86: correct the misleading comment in vmx_handle_external

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]

Message-ID: <20161012140508.GC30525@potion>
Date:   Wed, 12 Oct 2016 16:05:09 +0200
From:   Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
To:     "Longpeng (Mike)" <longpeng2@...wei.com>
Cc:     pbonzini@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
        hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, zhaoshenglong@...wei.com,
        richard.weiyang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm: x86: correct the misleading comment in
 vmx_handle_external_intr

2016-10-12 09:15+0800, Longpeng (Mike):
> On 2016/10/12 2:23, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> This part is acceptable as it gives a new information code, yet the
>> function does not modify flags, which makes it unremarkable.
>> And dependencies on the caller would be better described in a header
>> (if we cannot express them well in the code).
>> 
>> The most comment-worthy thing about this function is the reason why we
>> execute the interrupt handler manually, i.e. the dependency on
>> VM_EXIT_ACK_INTR_ON_EXIT, but that is easy to tell from the commit
>> message and convenient access to git history is essential in a workflow,
>> so providing a leeway could be counter-productive.
>> 
>> I would go with no comment for now.
> 
> Thanks for your patience, and your advice is useful for me.

I appreciate the patch, I just didn't want to repeat the same mistake
that you were fixing in the patch, which made me go into rambling mode.

Please send v2 with a simpler code comment (or no comment).
And you are more than welcome to improve the code even further!

> In addition, the comment below is misleading too, hope you can fix it
> simultaneously.
> 
> 	/* Interrupt is enabled by handle_external_intr() */
> 	kvm_x86_ops->handle_external_intr(vcpu);

Yep, this comment should have been expressed in a function name.
Paolo already fixed it in 1a6982353db9 ("KVM: x86: remove stale
comments").