linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] x86/quirks: Convert DMI matching to use a table

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]

Date:   Mon, 16 Mar 2020 17:54:15 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] x86/quirks: Convert DMI matching to use a table

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 05:27:30PM +0200, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> writes:
> 
> > +static const struct dmi_system_id x86_machine_table[] __initconst = {
> > +	{
> > +		.ident = "x86 Apple Macintosh",
> > +		.matches = {
> > +			DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Apple Inc."),
> > +		},
> > +		.driver_data = &x86_apple_machine,
> > +	},
> > +	{
> > +		.ident = "x86 Apple Macintosh",
> > +		.matches = {
> > +			DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Apple Computer, Inc."),
> > +		},
> > +		.driver_data = &x86_apple_machine,
> > +	},
> > +	{}
> > +};
> > +
> > +static void __init early_platform_detect_quirk(void)
> > +{
> > +	const struct dmi_system_id *id;
> > +
> > +	id = dmi_first_match(x86_machine_table);
> > +	if (!id)
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	printk(KERN_DEBUG "Detected %s platform\n", id->ident);
> > +	*((bool *)id->driver_data) = true;
> 
> I'd suggest that x86_apple_machine and the ones that you add further
> down this patchset, be made functions instead. That way you could at
> first hide the global bool(s) and then replace this with something a
> little more type safe.

I'm not sure we will get any benefit of the proposed change. Also it will be
more intrusive since we have dozen of modules that are using it in the form of
exported boolean.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko