linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] KVM: selftests: Introduce __kvm_pmu_event

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: <CAFg_LQVtcBaO-=dvrqe7OjMqift__x-F6FeJ8EEUh+Ei-tgyhg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 30 Jun 2023 10:47:40 +0800
From:   Jinrong Liang <ljr.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Aaron Lewis <aaronlewis@...gle.com>,
        David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
        Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com>,
        Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@...cent.com>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] KVM: selftests: Introduce __kvm_pmu_event_filter
 to improved event filter settings

Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> 于2023年6月29日周四 05:19写道：
>
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2023, Jinrong Liang wrote:
> > -static struct kvm_pmu_event_filter *remove_event(struct kvm_pmu_event_filter *f,
> > +static struct kvm_pmu_event_filter *remove_event(struct __kvm_pmu_event_filter *__f,
> >                                                uint64_t event)
>
> Can you tack on a patch to drop the return?  None of the callers consume it, and
> it incorrectly implies that the incoming filter isn't modified.

Thank you very much for your suggestion! I'm more than happy to follow
your advice and modify the code accordingly.

>
> >  {
> >       bool found = false;
> >       int i;
> > +     struct kvm_pmu_event_filter *f = (void *)__f;
>
> Nit, reverse xmas tree is preferred:
>
>         struct kvm_pmu_event_filter *f = (void *)__f;
>         bool found = false;
>         int i;
>
> Hoever, I don't think this one needs to cast, the cast is only necessary when
> invoking a KVM ioctl(), e.g. I believe this should work:
>
> static void remove_event(struct __kvm_pmu_event_filter *f, uint64_t event)
> {
>         bool found = false;
>         int i;
>
>         for (i = 0; i < f->nevents; i++) {
>                 if (found)
>                         f->events[i - 1] = f->events[i];
>                 else
>                         found = f->events[i] == event;
>         }
>         if (found)
>                 f->nevents--;
> }
> > @@ -569,19 +554,16 @@ static void run_masked_events_test(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> >                                  const uint64_t masked_events[],
> >                                  const int nmasked_events)
> >  {
> > -     struct kvm_pmu_event_filter *f;
> > +     struct __kvm_pmu_event_filter f = {
> > +         .nevents = nmasked_events,
> > +         .action = KVM_PMU_EVENT_ALLOW,
> > +         .flags = KVM_PMU_EVENT_FLAG_MASKED_EVENTS,
>
> Tabs, not spaces please.
>
> > +static int set_pmu_single_event_filter(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, uint64_t event,
> > +                                    uint32_t flags, uint32_t action)
> > +{
> > +     struct __kvm_pmu_event_filter f = {
> > +         .nevents = 1,
> > +         .flags = flags,
> > +         .action = action,
> > +         .events = {
> > +             event,
>
> Tabs.

I will include these change in the new patch version and ensure that
any related code is adjusted accordingly.

Once again, I truly appreciate your guidance!