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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 8 Feb 2022 18:01:21 -0300
From:   Martin Fernandez <martin.fernandez@...ypsium.com>
To:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
        bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
        hpa@...or.com, ardb@...nel.org, dvhart@...radead.org,
        andy@...radead.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, daniel.gutson@...ypsium.com,
        hughsient@...il.com, alex.bazhaniuk@...ypsium.com,
        alison.schofield@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/6] x86/e820: Refactor range_update and range_remove

On 2/8/22, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 01:45:40PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 01:43:25PM -0300, Martin Fernandez wrote:
>> > __e820__range_update and e820__range_remove had a very similar
>> > implementation with a few lines different from each other, the lines
>> > that actually perform the modification over the e820_table. The
>> > similiraties were found in the checks for the different cases on how
>> > each entry intersects with the given range (if it does at all). These
>> > checks were very presice and error prone so it was not a good idea to
>> > have them in both places.
>>
>> Yay removing copy/paste code! :)
>
> Removing copy/paste is nice but diffstat of
>
>  arch/x86/kernel/e820.c | 383 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 283 insertions(+), 100 deletions(-)
>
> does not look nice even accounting for lots of comments :(
>
> I didn't look closely, but diffstat clues that the refactoring making
> things much more complex.
>

Yes, that diffstat surprised me as well.

I have to mention that 110 of those lines are kerneldocs and blank
lines, which is quite a lot. Also you have to take into account that I
expanded most of the function definitions for better formatting, which
also took some space.

And as I was able to focus the "hard" part of the problem into a
single function, testing can be done easily as Kees suggested and I'm
planning to do so in the next patch.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ