linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] x86/mce: Use mca_msr_reg() in prepare

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:   Thu, 28 Oct 2021 10:53:28 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     "Koralahalli Channabasappa, Smita" <skoralah@....com>
Cc:     Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@....com>,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, yazen.ghannam@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] x86/mce: Use mca_msr_reg() in prepare_msrs()

On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 03:19:51PM -0500, Koralahalli Channabasappa, Smita wrote:
> Multiple initialization here I mean: Initializing the MCA registers twice.
> Prior to mca_msr_reg() replacement, the MCA registers were initialized
> separately for SMCA and legacy processors. However, this is not required
> after replacing with mca_msr_reg() as it does the job of returning the
> proper MSR addresses.

You mean, there was a simple if-else statement

	if (SMCA)

		prepare MSRs

	else

		prepare MSRs for !SMCA

which did the init for each type of system in one go.

But frankly, your change doesn't make it more readable but less - you
have a goto label now and another SMCA feature check at the end. Vs a
simple if-else which is trivial to read.

So I don't see any advantage in this change.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette