linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v17 3/3] vfio/nvgrace-gpu: Add vfio pci variant module for grace hopper

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: Thu, 8 Feb 2024 11:13:45 +0000
From: Ankit Agrawal <ankita@...dia.com>
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>, Alex Williamson
	<alex.williamson@...hat.com>, Zhi Wang <zhi.wang.linux@...il.com>
CC: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>,
	"mst@...hat.com" <mst@...hat.com>, "shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com"
	<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>, "clg@...hat.com" <clg@...hat.com>,
	"oleksandr@...alenko.name" <oleksandr@...alenko.name>, "K V P, Satyanarayana"
	<satyanarayana.k.v.p@...el.com>, "eric.auger@...hat.com"
	<eric.auger@...hat.com>, "brett.creeley@....com" <brett.creeley@....com>,
	"horms@...nel.org" <horms@...nel.org>, Rahul Rameshbabu
	<rrameshbabu@...dia.com>, Aniket Agashe <aniketa@...dia.com>, Neo Jia
	<cjia@...dia.com>, Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>, "Tarun Gupta
 (SW-GPU)" <targupta@...dia.com>, Vikram Sethi <vsethi@...dia.com>, Andy
 Currid <acurrid@...dia.com>, Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>, John
 Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, Dan Williams <danw@...dia.com>, "Anuj Aggarwal
 (SW-GPU)" <anuaggarwal@...dia.com>, Matt Ochs <mochs@...dia.com>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
	<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 3/3] vfio/nvgrace-gpu: Add vfio pci variant module for
 grace hopper

>> >>
>> >> If mem_count == 0, going through nvgrace_gpu_map_and_read() is not
>> >> necessary.
>> >
>> > Harmless, other than the possibly unnecessary call through to
>> > nvgrace_gpu_map_device_mem().  Maybe both
>> nvgrace_gpu_map_and_read()
>> > and nvgrace_gpu_map_and_write() could conditionally return 0 as their
>> > first operation when !mem_count.  Thanks,
>> >
>> >Alex
>>
>> IMO, this seems like adding too much code to reduce the call length for a
>> very specific case. If there aren't any strong opinion on this, I'm planning to
>> leave this code as it is.
>
> a slight difference. if mem_count==0 the result should always succeed
> no matter nvgrace_gpu_map_device_mem() succeeds or not. Of course
> if it fails it's already a big problem probably nobody cares about the subtle
> difference when reading non-exist range.
>
> but regarding to readability it's still clearer:
>
> if (mem_count)
>        nvgrace_gpu_map_and_read();

Makes sense. I'll change it.