linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/15] riscv: abstract out CSR names for supervisor vs machine mode

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: <20191028081244.GA20974@lst.de>
Date:   Mon, 28 Oct 2019 09:12:44 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@....com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/15] riscv: abstract out CSR names for supervisor vs
 machine mode

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 04:55:02PM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> The basic idea looks good to me, but some of the X-prefixing can make the 
> code difficult to read.  The Xret macro looks fine to me, as do the 
> XIE_XTIE macros.  But I think it would be better if the X-prefixes on the 
> rest of the macros and structure members could be dropped.  This also 
> aligns with the way that these registers often are discussed at the 
> architectural level; e.g., we'd talk about the "epc" registers, not the 
> "xepc" registers.

If we get of the x we should get rid of all of them.  I'll make sure it
is all gone for the next version.