[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fbf213f2-f118-ccfa-3faa-ec8b2182595b@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 06:47:01 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Improve comments for
sgx_encl_lookup/alloc_backing()
On 7/28/22 00:58, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 11:21:19AM -0700, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
>> Modify the comments for sgx_encl_lookup_backing() and for
>> sgx_encl_alloc_backing() to indicate that they take a reference
>> which must be dropped with a call to sgx_encl_put_backing().
>> Make sgx_encl_lookup_backing() static for now, and change the
>> name of sgx_encl_get_backing() to __sgx_encl_get_backing() to
>> make it more clear that sgx_encl_get_backing() is an internal
>> function.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>
> The rename is unnecessary.
Well, it was done to address some reviewer confusion:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/YtUs3MKLzFg+rqEV@zn.tnic/
I wouldn't call it unnecessary. Heck, I'd argue that the one of the
main reasons that this code leaked memory in the first place was the
naming and lack of comments.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists