linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] xen: rename wrong named pfn related variables

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]

Date:   Wed, 16 Jun 2021 11:56:52 +0200
From:   Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
To:     Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc:     Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xen: rename wrong named pfn related variables

On 16.06.2021 09:30, Juergen Gross wrote:
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c
> @@ -95,8 +95,8 @@ unsigned long *xen_p2m_addr __read_mostly;
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_addr);
>  unsigned long xen_p2m_size __read_mostly;
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_size);
> -unsigned long xen_max_p2m_pfn __read_mostly;
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_max_p2m_pfn);
> +unsigned long xen_p2m_max_size __read_mostly;
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_max_size);

Instead of renaming the exported variable (which will break consumers
anyway), how about dropping the apparently unneeded export at this
occasion? Further it looks to me as if xen_p2m_size and this variable
were actually always kept in sync, so I'd like to put up the question
of dropping one of the two.

> @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ static pte_t *p2m_identity_pte;
>   * can avoid scanning the whole P2M (which may be sized to account for
>   * hotplugged memory).
>   */
> -static unsigned long xen_p2m_last_pfn;
> +static unsigned long xen_p2m_pfn_limit;

As to the comment remark in patch 1: You don't alter the comment
here either, and "limit" still doesn't make clear whether that's an
inclusive or exclusive limit.

Jan