linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND v5 1/4] ACPI: APEI: EINJ: Refactor available_error_type

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: <20231108201905.GCZUvtOSDkVqFPBmfk@fat_crate.local>
Date:   Wed, 8 Nov 2023 21:19:05 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Avadhut Naik <avadhut.naik@....com>
Cc:     linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, rafael@...nel.org, lenb@...nel.org,
        james.morse@....com, tony.luck@...el.com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, alexey.kardashevskiy@....com,
        yazen.ghannam@....com, avadnaik@....com
Subject: Re: [RESEND v5 1/4] ACPI: APEI: EINJ: Refactor
 available_error_type_show()

On Tue, Nov 07, 2023 at 03:36:44PM -0600, Avadhut Naik wrote:
> +static struct { u32 mask; const char *str; } const einj_error_type_string[] = {
> +	{BIT(0), "Processor Correctable"},
> +	{BIT(1), "Processor Uncorrectable non-fatal"},
> +	{BIT(2), "Processor Uncorrectable fatal"},
> +	{BIT(3), "Memory Correctable"},
> +	{BIT(4), "Memory Uncorrectable non-fatal"},
> +	{BIT(5), "Memory Uncorrectable fatal"},
> +	{BIT(6), "PCI Express Correctable"},
> +	{BIT(7), "PCI Express Uncorrectable non-fatal"},
> +	{BIT(8), "PCI Express Uncorrectable fatal"},
> +	{BIT(9), "Platform Correctable"},
> +	{BIT(10), "Platform Uncorrectable non-fatal"},
> +	{BIT(11), "Platform Uncorrectable fatal"},
> +	{BIT(12), "CXL.cache Protocol Correctable"},
> +	{BIT(13), "CXL.cache Protocol Uncorrectable non-fatal"},
> +	{BIT(14), "CXL.cache Protocol Uncorrectable fatal"},
> +	{BIT(15), "CXL.mem Protocol Correctable"},
> +	{BIT(16), "CXL.mem Protocol Uncorrectable non-fatal"},
> +	{BIT(17), "CXL.mem Protocol Uncorrectable fatal"},

Might as well put spaces between the '{' and '}' brackets for better
readability.

>  static int available_error_type_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> @@ -607,8 +607,9 @@ static int available_error_type_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>  	if (rc)
>  		return rc;
>  	for (int pos = 0; pos < ARRAY_SIZE(einj_error_type_string); pos++)
> -		if (available_error_type & BIT(pos))
> -			seq_puts(m, einj_error_type_string[pos]);
> +		if (available_error_type & einj_error_type_string[pos].mask)

Call that variable simply "error_type". Those are simple functions, one
can see that it is the available error type.

> +			seq_printf(m, "0x%08x\t%s\n", einj_error_type_string[pos].mask,
> +				   einj_error_type_string[pos].str);
>  
>  	return 0;

But those are just nitpicks.

Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@...en8.de>

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette