linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] drm/i915/gvt: Constify static structs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 16 Dec 2021 19:21:00 +0000
From:   "Wang, Zhi A" <zhi.a.wang@...el.com>
To:     Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>
CC:     Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Vivi, Rodrigo" <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
        Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        "intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org" 
        <intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] drm/i915/gvt: Constify static structs

On 12/12/2021 3:25 PM, Rikard Falkeborn worte:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 09:00:56AM +0000, Wang, Zhi A wrote:
>> On 12/4/2021 12:55 PM, Rikard Falkeborn wrote:
>>> Constify a number of static structs that are never modified to allow the
>>> compiler to put them in read-only memory. In order to do this, constify a
>>> number of local variables and pointers in structs.
>>>
>>> This is most important for structs that contain function pointers, and
>>> the patches for those structs are placed first in the series.
>>>
>>> Rikard Falkeborn (9):
>>>     drm/i915/gvt: Constify intel_gvt_gtt_pte_ops
>>>     drm/i915/gvt: Constify intel_gvt_gtt_pte_ops
>>>     drm/i915/gvt: Constify intel_gvt_irq_ops
>>>     drm/i915/gvt: Constify intel_gvt_sched_policy_ops
>>>     drm/i915/gvt: Constify gvt_mmio_block
>>>     drm/i915/gvt: Constify cmd_interrupt_events
>>>     drm/i915/gvt: Constify formats
>>>     drm/i915/gvt: Constify gtt_type_table_entry
>>>     drm/i915/gvt: Constify vgpu_types
>>>
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/cmd_parser.c   |  2 +-
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/fb_decoder.c   | 24 ++++-----
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gtt.c          | 68 ++++++++++++-------------
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gtt.h          |  4 +-
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.h          |  2 +-
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/handlers.c     | 12 ++---
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/interrupt.c    | 10 ++--
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/interrupt.h    |  2 +-
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/sched_policy.c |  2 +-
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/scheduler.h    |  2 +-
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/vgpu.c         |  4 +-
>>>    11 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
>>>
>> Thanks so much for the contribuition. You only need to refine the PATCH
>> 2 a little bit and re-send it.
>>
> Thanks for reviewing. Just to clarify, did you mean patch 7 (since
> that's the one you commented on)? And is it enough to send just that
> patch or do you want the entire series resent?
>
> Rikard

Hi Rikard,  no worries then. I have already corrected them and queue 
them in the gvt-next branch, you can double check them if you like. They 
are going through a QA test cycle first and later start their journey to 
the upstream. All good. :) Thanks so much for the contribution again.

Zhi.