linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: s390: cpu model: Use previously unused constant

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]

Date:   Mon, 06 Nov 2023 12:00:19 +0100
From:   Nina Schoetterl-Glausch <nsg@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
        Michael Mueller <mimu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: s390: cpu model: Use previously unused constant

On Fri, 2023-11-03 at 19:41 +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 03.11.23 19:36, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > On 03.11.23 18:30, Nina Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
> > > No point in defining a size for the mask if we're not going to use it.
> > 
> > I neither understand the patch description nor what the bug is that is
> > being fixed (and how that description relates to the patch
> > subject+description).
> > 
> > Please improve the patch description.
> > 
> 
> Should this be
> 
> "
> KVM: s390: cpu model: use proper define for facility mask size
> 
> We're using S390_ARCH_FAC_LIST_SIZE_U64 instead of 
> S390_ARCH_FAC_MASK_SIZE_U64 to define the array size of the facility 
> mask. Let's properly use S390_ARCH_FAC_MASK_SIZE_U64. Note that both
> values are the same and, therefore, this is a pure cleanup.
> "
> 
> I'm not convinced there is a bug and that this deserves a "Fixes:".

Oh yeah, sorry, purely a cleanup. S390_ARCH_FAC_MASK_SIZE_U64 wasn't
used anywhere. I also considered just getting rid of it and using one
constant for both list and mask.