linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] s390/cio: Rename bitmap_size() as idset_bitmap

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]

Message-ID: <62d3cfcd-a32e-59d1-c376-c95e8da1049f@wanadoo.fr>
Date:   Sat, 2 Jul 2022 21:42:02 +0200
From:   Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     dm-devel@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] s390/cio: Rename bitmap_size() as idset_bitmap_size()

Le 02/07/2022 à 21:32, Andy Shevchenko a écrit :
> On Sat, Jul 02, 2022 at 09:24:24PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>> Le 02/07/2022 à 20:54, Andy Shevchenko a écrit :
>>> On Sat, Jul 02, 2022 at 08:29:09PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>>>> -		memset(set->bitmap, 0, bitmap_size(num_ssid, num_id));
>>>> +		memset(set->bitmap, 0, idset_bitmap_size(num_ssid, num_id));
>>>
>>> Why not to use bitmap_zero()?
> 
> ...
> 
>>>> -	memset(set->bitmap, 0xff, bitmap_size(set->num_ssid, set->num_id));
>>>> +	memset(set->bitmap, 0xff, idset_bitmap_size(set->num_ssid, set->num_id));
>>>
>>> Why not to use bitmap_fill() ?
> 
>> For this initial step, I wanted to keep changes as minimal as possible (i.e
>> just function renaming)
>>
>> In fact, I plan to send a follow-up patch on this file.
>> This would remove the newly renamed idset_bitmap_size() function, use the
>> bitmap API directly (as you pointed-out) with
>> "set->num_ssid * set->num_id" as size.
>>
>> It is already done this way in idset_is_empty(), so it would be more
>> consistent.
>>
>> If the serie needs a v2 (or if required), I can add an additional 5th patch
>> for it. Otherwise it will send separatly later.
> 
> If you use bitmap APIs as I suggested above as the first patch, the rest will
> have less unneeded churn, no?
> 
> 

Makes sense.

I'll wait for some other potential comments 1 day or 2 and send a v2 
with the simplification you propose as an initial step.

Thanks for your feed-back.

CJ