linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/14] cxl/mem: Find device capabilities

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: <20210204152901.pzjnyr64xlvo6yup@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 07:29:01 -0800
From:   Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        Chris Browy <cbrowy@...ry-design.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        daniel.lll@...baba-inc.com,
        "John Groves (jgroves)" <jgroves@...ron.com>,
        "Kelley, Sean V" <sean.v.kelley@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] cxl/mem: Find device capabilities

On 21-02-04 07:16:46, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 01:23:31PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > I'd prefer to keep the helpers for now as I do find them helpful, and so far
> > > nobody else who has touched the code has complained. If you feel strongly, I
> > > will change it.
> > 
> > After seeing the options, I think I'd prefer to not have to worry what
> > extra magic is happening with cxl_read_mbox_reg32()
> > 
> > cxl_read_mbox_reg32(cxlm, CXLDEV_MB_CAPS_OFFSET);
> > 
> > readl(cxlm->mbox_regs + CXLDEV_MB_CAPS_OFFSET);
> > 
> > The latter is both shorter and more idiomatic.
> 
> Same here.  That being said I know some driver maintainers like
> wrappers, my real main irk was the macro magic to generate them.

I think the wrapper is often used as a means of trying to have cross OS
compatibility to some degree. Just to be clear, that was *not* the purpose here.

Stating I disagree for posterity, I'll begin reworking this code and it will be
changed for v2.

Thanks.
Ben