linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 01/13] bpf: x86: Factor out emission of ModR/M for *(reg + off)

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: <20201201121437.GB2114905@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Dec 2020 12:14:37 +0000
From:   Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>,
        Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 01/13] bpf: x86: Factor out emission of
 ModR/M for *(reg + off)

On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 05:15:52PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 05:57:26PM +0000, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> > +/* Emit the ModR/M byte for addressing *(r1 + off) and r2 */
> > +static void emit_modrm_dstoff(u8 **pprog, u32 r1, u32 r2, int off)
> 
> same concern as in the another patch. If you could avoid intel's puzzling names
> like above it will make reviewing the patch easier.

In this case there is actually a call like

  emit_modrm_dstoff(&prog, src_reg, dst_reg)

So calling the function args dst_reg, src_reg would be misleading.

I could call them ptr_reg and val_reg or something?