linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFCv2 3/9] kvm/arm64: Rename kvm_vcpu_get_hsr() to kvm_vcpu_get

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: <e71af813-7f72-9d2e-2419-f4e03cf35369@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 May 2020 16:34:05 +1000
From:   Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
To:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        will@...nel.org, catalin.marinas@....com, james.morse@....com,
        suzuki.poulose@....com, drjones@...hat.com, eric.auger@...hat.com,
        aarcange@...hat.com, shan.gavin@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFCv2 3/9] kvm/arm64: Rename kvm_vcpu_get_hsr() to
 kvm_vcpu_get_esr()

On 5/27/20 5:20 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2020-05-27 03:43, Gavin Shan wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> On 5/26/20 8:42 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 01:29:13PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
>>>> Since kvm/arm32 was removed, this renames kvm_vcpu_get_hsr() to
>>>> kvm_vcpu_get_esr() to it a bit more self-explaining because the
>>>> functions returns ESR instead of HSR on aarch64. This shouldn't
>>>> cause any functional changes.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
>>>
>>> I think that this would be a nice cleanup on its own, and could be taken
>>> independently of the rest of this series if it were rebased and sent as
>>> a single patch.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, I'll see how PATCH[3,4,5] can be posted independently
>> as part of the preparatory work, which is suggested by you
>> in another reply.
>>
>> By the way, I assume the cleanup patches are good enough to
>> target 5.8.rc1/rc2 if you agree.
> 
> It's fine to base them on -rc1 or -rc2. They will not be merged
> before 5.9 though.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>          M.

Sure, Thanks, Marc!