[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230814164804.GO776869@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2023 18:48:04 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Dionna Glaze <dionnaglaze@...gle.com>,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] virt: sevguest: Add TSM_REPORTS support for
SNP_{GET, GET_EXT}_REPORT
On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 09:25:06AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 12:43:38AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > +static u8 *sev_report_new(struct device *dev, const struct tsm_desc *desc,
> >
> > > + size_t *outblob_len)
> > > +{
> >
> > > +
> > > + u8 *buf __free(kvfree) = kvzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> > > +
> >
> > > +
> > > + *outblob_len = size;
> > > + no_free_ptr(buf);
> > > + return buf;
> >
> > This seems broken, no_free_ptr(x) is basically xchg(X, NULL) (except no
> > atomics). So the above would end up being:
> >
> > return NULL;
> >
> > What you want to write is somehting like:
> >
> > return no_free_ptr(buf);
> >
> > or, a convenient shorthand:
> >
> > return_ptr(buf);
> >
>
> Oh, I indeed did not realize that no_free_ptr() had side effects beyond
> canceling the free when the variable goes out of scope. Will switch to
> return_ptr().
Indeed -- ideally no_free_ptr() would be combined with __must_check, but
I'm not immediately sure how to pull that off. Let me stick that on the
to-do list.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists