linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] PCI / ACPI: Remove the need for 'struct hotplug

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: <20190419220220.GI173520@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Apr 2019 17:02:20 -0500
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To:     Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>
Cc:     austin_bolen@...l.com, alex_gagniuc@...lteam.com,
        keith.busch@...el.com, Shyam_Iyer@...l.com, lukas@...ner.de,
        okaya@...nel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] PCI / ACPI: Remove the need for 'struct
 hotplug_params'

On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 03:07:45PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:24:12AM -0600, Alexandru Gagniuc wrote:
> > We used to first parse all the _HPP and _HPX tables before using the
> > information to program registers of PCIe devices. Up until HPX type 2,
> > there was only one structure of each type, so we could cheat and store
> > it on the stack.
> > 
> > With HPX type 3 we get an arbitrary number of entries, so the above
> > model doesn't scale that well. Instead of parsing all tables at once,
> > parse and program each entry separately. For _HPP and _HPX 0 thru 2,
> > this is functionally equivalent. The change enables the upcoming _HPX3
> > to integrate more easily.
> 
> I think this is tremendous!  It's going to simplify this code
> dramatically.  Two comments below.

> >  static void pci_configure_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
> >  {
> > -	struct hotplug_params hpp;
> > -	int ret;
> > +	static const struct hotplug_program_ops hp_ops = {
> > +		.program_type0 = program_hpp_type0,
> > +		.program_type1 = program_hpp_type1,
> > +		.program_type2 = program_hpp_type2,
> > +	};
> 
> What if we just moved program_hpp_type0(), etc from probe.c to
> pci-acpi.c?  The only reason I see to have it in probe.c is for
> pci_default_type0, and I think that is a pretty obtuse way of doing
> default configuration.  I would have no problem at all just hardcoding
> those defaults in probe.c and then potentially having them overwritten
> by _HPP/_HPX.

Actually, never mind about this.  This would be a perfect project for
mentoring a Linux newbie.

I'll merge this series as-is and any restructuring/cleanup can happen
later, since it's not related to this series anyway.

Bjorn