linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 8/8] iommu/vt-d: Misc macro clean up for SVM

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: <20191202115150.616cdad2@jacob-builder>
Date:   Mon, 2 Dec 2019 11:51:50 -0800
From:   Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>, Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
        Eric Auger <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
        "Mehta, Sohil" <sohil.mehta@...el.com>,
        jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 8/8] iommu/vt-d: Misc macro clean up for SVM

On Mon, 02 Dec 2019 10:22:13 -0800
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2019-12-02 at 10:15 -0800, Jacob Pan wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 13:37:10 -0800
> > Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > On Thu, 2019-11-21 at 13:26 -0800, Jacob Pan wrote:  
> > > > Use combined macros for_each_svm_dev() to simplify SVM device
> > > > iteration and error checking.    
> > > []  
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel-svm.c
> > > > b/drivers/iommu/intel-svm.c    
> > > []  
> > > > +#define for_each_svm_dev(sdev, svm, d)			\
> > > > +	list_for_each_entry((sdev), &(svm)->devs, list)
> > > > \
> > > > +		if ((d) != (sdev)->dev) {} else
> > > > +
> > > >  int intel_svm_bind_mm(struct device *dev, int *pasid, int
> > > > flags, struct svm_dev_ops *ops) {
> > > >  	struct intel_iommu *iommu =
> > > > intel_svm_device_to_iommu(dev); @@ -274,15 +278,13 @@ int
> > > > intel_svm_bind_mm(struct device *dev, int *pasid, int flags,
> > > > struct svm_dev_ goto out; }
> > > >  
> > > > -			list_for_each_entry(sdev, &svm->devs,
> > > > list) {
> > > > -				if (dev == sdev->dev) {
> > > > -					if (sdev->ops != ops) {
> > > > -						ret = -EBUSY;
> > > > -						goto out;
> > > > -					}
> > > > -					sdev->users++;
> > > > -					goto success;
> > > > +			for_each_svm_dev(sdev, svm, dev) {
> > > > +				if (sdev->ops != ops) {
> > > > +					ret = -EBUSY;
> > > > +					goto out;
> > > >  				}
> > > > +				sdev->users++;
> > > > +				goto success;
> > > >  			}    
> > > 
> > > I think this does not read better as this is now a
> > > for_each loop that exits the loop on the first match.
> > >   
> > I think one of the benefits is reduced indentation. What do you
> > recommend?  
> 
> Making the code intelligible for a reader.
> 
> At least add a comment describing why there is only
> a single possible match.
> 
> Given the for_each name, it's odd code that only the
> first match has an action.
> 
I will add a comment to explain we are trying to find the matching
device on the list.

Thanks