linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/paravirt: Cleanup native

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:33:16 +0200
From:   Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/paravirt: Cleanup native_patch()

On 10/09/18 09:01, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 08:54:12AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> +	case PARAVIRT_PATCH(lock.queued_spin_unlock):
>>> +		if (pv_is_native_spin_unlock())
>>> +			return paravirt_patch_insns(ibuf, len,
>>> +						    start_lock_queued_spin_unlock,
>>> +						    end_lock_queued_spin_unlock);
>>> +		else
>>> +			return paravirt_patch_default(type, ibuf, addr, len);
>>
>> Why not replace the else clause by a "break;" and ...
> 
> Because I think that exiting right then and there is much easier to
> follow than adding all those breaks and wading through ifdeffery
> to realize that this is the default path and we'll end up calling
> paravirt_patch_default() in the end.
> 

Really? All of the remaining coding would fit easily on one screen. No
hidden breaks anywhere and no deep nesting involved. And the ifdefs
hardly makes it more difficult to understand, as they are not even
nested.


Juergen