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:   Mon, 1 Nov 2021 13:51:38 -0500
From:   "Koralahalli Channabasappa, Smita" <skoralah@....com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
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 10/28/21 3:53 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:

> 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.

Okay. I will rework and remove this patch in my next series.

Thanks,

>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ