linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Improve comments for sgx_encl_lookup/alloc

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:   Mon, 1 Aug 2022 19:41:32 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc:     Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>,
        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 Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 07:40:42PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 06:47:01AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> Maybe the rename should be its own patch with this tag in the commit:
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/YtUs3MKLzFg+rqEV@zn.tnic/

Actually, just adding this to the current patch would be fine
(no need to split necessariy).

BR, Jarkko