linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] x86/cpu: Introduce INTEL_CPU_FAM*

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: <20180831155104.GZ11447@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 31 Aug 2018 18:51:04 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] x86/cpu: Introduce INTEL_CPU_FAM*_NODATA() helper
 macros

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 08:41:28AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> writes:
> > +
> > +#define INTEL_CPU_FAM_ANY_NODATA(_family, _model)		\
> > +	INTEL_CPU_FAM_ANY(_family, _model, NULL)
> > +
> > +#define INTEL_CPU_FAM6_NODATA(_model)				\
> > +	INTEL_CPU_FAM_ANY_NODATA(6, INTEL_FAM6_##_model)

> _NODATA is actually longer than passing NULL ?

One character longer (you have to compare to ", NULL").

> Seems unnecessary

Let's gather other's opinions.

P.S. In any case some refactoring is needed to allow NULL in parameters (move &
out from base macro).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko