linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 3/9] RISC-V: shunt isa_ext

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: <20230626-2b8f42ace039368c8e917393@orel>
Date:   Mon, 26 Jun 2023 17:44:18 +0200
From:   Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
Cc:     palmer@...belt.com, conor@...nel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@...ll.eu>,
        Evan Green <evan@...osinc.com>,
        Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/9] RISC-V: shunt isa_ext_arr to cpufeature.c

On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 05:29:04PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 12:19:41PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
...
> > +const struct riscv_isa_ext_data riscv_isa_ext[] = {
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicbom, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOM),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicboz, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOZ),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicntr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICNTR),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicsr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICSR),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zifencei, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIFENCEI),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihintpause, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHINTPAUSE),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihpm, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHPM),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zba, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBA),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbb, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbs, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBS),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(smaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMAIA),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(ssaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSAIA),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sscofpmf, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSCOFPMF),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sstc, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSTC),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svinval, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svnapot, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVNAPOT),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svpbmt, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVPBMT),
> > +	__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA("", RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX),
> 
> I think we can either drop this null entry or drop the count variable
> below. My preference would be to drop the count variable, and always
> loop to the null.

Eh, never mind, the entry isn't null, it's "". Why do we have that entry
though? I guess it can be dropped?

Thanks,
drew