linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/24] selftests/resctrl: Remove unnecessary _

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6af4deba-eb9d-f796-891b-fc179282b8df@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Nov 2023 11:19:11 +0200 (EET)
From:   Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
cc:     linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@...fujitsu.com>,
        Maciej Wieczór-Retman 
        <maciej.wieczor-retman@...el.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/24] selftests/resctrl: Remove unnecessary __u64 ->
 unsigned long conversion

On Thu, 2 Nov 2023, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> On 10/24/2023 2:26 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > Perf counters are __u64 but the code converts them to unsigned long
> > before printing them out.
> > 
> > Remove unnecessary type conversion and the potential loss of meaningful
> > bits due to different sizes of types.
> 
> This motivation is not clear to me. Is this work done in
> preparation for 32 bit testing? This raises a lot more topics if
> this is the case.

So you oppose stating that second part after "and"?

My main motivation was keeping the types consistent when I noted that the 
code does unnecessary conversion to unsigned long (that's the first part 
before "and").

Of course it has the added benefit of being 32-bit compatible but
it was just a thought I added "automatically" without paying much 
attention on whether it's realistic to assume resctrl selftest as whole 
would work with 32-bit or not (objectively, the after patch code is 32-bit 
compatible but it of course gives no guarantees about the rest of the 
resctrl selftest code base).

-- 
 i.