linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v18 02/18] RISC-V: Add initial skeletal KVM support

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: <20210519101704.GT1955@kadam>
Date:   Wed, 19 May 2021 13:17:04 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Alexander Graf <graf@...zon.com>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
        Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@....com>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@....com>,
        Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 02/18] RISC-V: Add initial skeletal KVM support

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 09:05:37AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> +void kvm_riscv_stage2_free_pgd(struct kvm *kvm)
> +{
> +	/* TODO: */
> +}
> +

I was disappointed how many stub functions remained at the end of the
patchset...  It's better to not publish those.  How useful is this
patchset with the functionality that is implemented currently?

> +int kvm_arch_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long type)
> +{
> +	int r;
> +
> +	r = kvm_riscv_stage2_alloc_pgd(kvm);
> +	if (r)
> +		return r;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

Half the code uses "int ret;" and half uses "int r;".  Make everything
int ret.

regards,
dan carpenter