linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] arm64: Move instruction encoder/decoder under lib/

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: <9c01f293-2c98-43e6-a497-89610fe5970e@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 3 Feb 2021 09:26:45 +0100
From:   Julien Thierry <jthierry@...hat.com>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, broonie@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] arm64: Move instruction encoder/decoder under
 lib/

Hi Mark,

On 2/2/21 11:17 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hi Julien,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 06:17:41PM +0100, Julien Thierry wrote:
>> Aarch64 instruction set encoding and decoding logic can prove useful
>> for some features/tools both part of the kernel and outside the kernel.
>>
>> Isolate the function dealing only with encoding/decoding instructions,
>> with minimal dependency on kernel utilities in order to be able to reuse
>> that code.
>>
>> Code was only moved, no code should have been added, removed nor
>> modifier.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Julien Thierry <jthierry@...hat.com>
> 
> This looks sound, but the diff is a little hard to check.
> 

Yes, I was expecting this change to be hard to digest.

> Would it be possible to split this into two patches, where:
> 
> 1) Refactoring definitions into insn.h and insn.c, leaving those files
>     in their current locations.
> 

I'm not quite sure I understand the suggestions. After this patch insn.h 
and insn.c still contain some definitions that can't really be used 
outside of kernel code which is why I split them into insn.* and 
aarch64-insn.* (the latter containing what could be used by tools).

Or do you suggest that I still create the aarch64-insn.* files next to 
the insn.* files?


> 2) Moving insn.h and insn.c out to arch/arm64/lib/, updating includes
> > With that, the second patch might be easier for git to identify as a
> rename (if using `git format-patch -M -C`), and it'd be easier to see
> that there are no unintended changes.
> 

But it is more a split than a rename (at least in this patch). But I'm 
happy to do this in another way.

Thanks,

-- 
Julien Thierry