linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86/xen: Make number of event channels defines less magical

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]

Message-ID: <Y35c21N1fVI2+FZD@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 23 Nov 2022 17:48:11 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Durrant <paul@....org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86/xen: Make number of event channels defines less
 magical

On Tue, Nov 22, 2022, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-11-22 at 20:31 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> How's something like this? I did start typing that comment in the
> max_evtchn_port() function in xen.c but moved it over.
> 
> Still not utterly convinced, as it's still somewhat circular — we now
> define NR_CHANNELS as (32*32) with a big comment explaining *why* that
> is, and the reason is basically "because that's the number of bits in
> an array of uint32_t[32]".

Agreed, probably not an improvement across the board.  Consistency with how the
non-compat code declares the fields is also valuable, so unless someone changes
upstream Xen code, let's just leave things as-is.