linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] kvm/x86 : Remove redundant function implement

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: <629b1ca1-66a3-f616-71a9-3fda3b03aeb4@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 May 2020 15:36:37 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        彭浩(Richard) <richard.peng@...o.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] kvm/x86 : Remove redundant function implement

On 21/05/20 11:27, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> 彭浩(Richard) <richard.peng@...o.com> writes:
> 
>> pic_in_kernel(),ioapic_in_kernel() and irqchip_kernel() have the
>> same implementation.
> 'pic_in_kernel()' name is misleading, one may think this is about lapic
> and it's not. Also, ioapic_in_kernel() doesn't have that many users, can
> we maybe converge on using irqchip_*() functions everywhere?
> 

Richard's patch was my recommendation actually.

PIC is not the LAPIC and not the IOAPIC; even though right now the
implementation is the same for pic_in_kernel and ioapic_in_kernel and
irqchip_kernel(), that's more or less an implementation detail.

Paolo