linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] Powerpc/hw-breakpoint: Refactor hw_breakpoint_arch

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: <35d3cdbc-4216-f103-1cea-4413c0933dbd@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jun 2019 12:40:52 +0530
From:   Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
Cc:     mpe@...erman.id.au, benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
        mikey@...ling.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, npiggin@...il.com,
        naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Powerpc/hw-breakpoint: Refactor
 hw_breakpoint_arch_parse()



On 6/18/19 11:51 AM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> 
> 
> Le 18/06/2019 à 06:27, Ravi Bangoria a écrit :
>> Move feature availability check at the start of the function.
>> Rearrange comment to it's associated code. Use hw->address and
>> hw->len in the 512 bytes boundary check(to write if statement
>> in a single line). Add spacing between code blocks.
> 
> Are those cosmetic changes in the boundary check worth it since they disappear in the final patch ?

Nope.. not necessary. I was just going bit more patch by patch.
I don't mind keeping the code as it is and then change it in
the final patch.