linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/4] mm: cma: Add dma

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: <CALAqxLVt0HJH5_2BvO7fRGZ_Vp9kKzj+j2=BZu_cbw=75dNoYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 1 May 2020 11:42:28 -0700
From:   John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:     Brian Starkey <brian.starkey@....com>
Cc:     lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        "Andrew F. Davis" <afd@...com>,
        Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>,
        Liam Mark <lmark@...eaurora.org>,
        Pratik Patel <pratikp@...eaurora.org>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
        Chenbo Feng <fengc@...gle.com>,
        Alistair Strachan <astrachan@...gle.com>,
        Sandeep Patil <sspatil@...gle.com>,
        Hridya Valsaraju <hridya@...gle.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, nd <nd@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/4] mm: cma: Add dma_heap flag to cma structure

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 3:48 AM Brian Starkey <brian.starkey@....com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 07:39:47AM +0000, John Stultz wrote:
> > +bool cma_dma_heap_enabled(struct cma *cma)
> > +{
> > +     return !!cma->dma_heap;
>
> Stylistic thing, but I don't think the !! is really necessary. It's
> already a bool anyway.

Yea, I was using a bit field earlier and then moved to a bool for
simplicity and left this. I saw it as soon as I sent the patch, so
it's already fixed up.

> > @@ -157,6 +167,7 @@ static int __init cma_init_reserved_areas(void)
> >  }
> >  core_initcall(cma_init_reserved_areas);
> >
> > +
>
> nit: spurious newline

Yep. Same. The things you only see once the mail is sent. :)

Thanks so much for the review though!
-john