linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm/gup: add compound page list iterator

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: <2919605d-f00f-4a07-8420-6b6d0a42081a@nvidia.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 15:37:43 -0800
From:   John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
CC:     Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox" <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm/gup: add compound page list iterator

On 2/4/21 11:53 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 03:00:01PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
>>> +static inline void compound_next(unsigned long i, unsigned long npages,
>>> +				 struct page **list, struct page **head,
>>> +				 unsigned int *ntails)
>>> +{
>>> +	if (i >= npages)
>>> +		return;
>>> +
>>> +	*ntails = count_ntails(list + i, npages - i);
>>> +	*head = compound_head(list[i]);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +#define for_each_compound_head(i, list, npages, head, ntails) \
>>
>> When using macros, which are dangerous in general, you have to worry about
>> things like name collisions. I really dislike that C has forced this unsafe
>> pattern upon us, but of course we are stuck with it, for iterator helpers.
>>
>> Given that we're stuck, you should probably use names such as __i, __list, etc,
>> in the the above #define. Otherwise you could stomp on existing variables.
> 
> Not this macro, it after cpp gets through with it all the macro names
> vanish, it can't collide with variables.
> 

Yes, I guess it does just vaporize, because it turns all the args into
their substituted values. I was just having flashbacks from similar cases
I guess.

> The usual worry is you might collide with other #defines, but we don't
> seem to worry about that in the kernel
> 

Well, I worry about it a little anyway. haha :)


thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA