linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ACPI/PPTT: Add support for ACPI 6.3 thread flag

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]

Date:   Tue, 18 Jun 2019 15:40:24 +0100
From:   Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
To:     Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com, rjw@...ysocki.net,
        sudeep.holla@....com, lenb@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ACPI/PPTT: Add support for ACPI 6.3 thread flag

On 18/06/2019 15:21, Jeremy Linton wrote:
[...]
>>> + * Return: -ENOENT if the PPTT doesn't exist, the CPU cannot be found or
>>> + *       the table revision isn't new enough.
>>> + * Otherwise returns flag value
>>> + */
>>
>> Nit: strictly speaking we're not returning the flag value but its mask
>> applied to the flags field. I don't think anyone will care about getting
>> the actual flag value, but it should be made obvious in the doc:
> 
> Or I clarify the code to actually do what the comments says. Maybe that is what John G was also pointing out too?
> 

Mmm I didn't find any reply from John regarding this in v1, but I wouldn't
mind either way, as long as the doc & code are aligned.

[...]