linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 03/31] x86/resctrl: Move ctrlval string parsing policy away from the arch code

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]

Message-ID: <1776b49b-3c0e-41a7-bbc5-19310c428429@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 17:13:01 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: James Morse <james.morse@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
 Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
 Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
 Babu Moger <Babu.Moger@....com>, shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com,
 D Scott Phillips OS <scott@...amperecomputing.com>,
 carl@...amperecomputing.com, lcherian@...vell.com,
 bobo.shaobowang@...wei.com, tan.shaopeng@...itsu.com,
 baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, Jamie Iles <quic_jiles@...cinc.com>,
 Xin Hao <xhao@...ux.alibaba.com>, peternewman@...gle.com,
 dfustini@...libre.com, amitsinght@...vell.com,
 Rex Nie <rex.nie@...uarmicro.com>, Dave Martin <dave.martin@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 03/31] x86/resctrl: Move ctrlval string parsing policy
 away from the arch code

>   /*
>    * Check whether MBA bandwidth percentage value is correct. The value is
>    * checked against the minimum and max bandwidth values specified by the
> @@ -59,8 +68,8 @@ static bool bw_validate(char *buf, unsigned long *data, struct rdt_resource *r)
>   	return true;
>   }
>   
> -int parse_bw(struct rdt_parse_data *data, struct resctrl_schema *s,
> -	     struct rdt_domain *d)
> +static int parse_bw(struct rdt_parse_data *data, struct resctrl_schema *s,
> +		    struct rdt_domain *d)
>   {
>   	struct resctrl_staged_config *cfg;
>   	u32 closid = data->rdtgrp->closid;
> @@ -138,8 +147,8 @@ static bool cbm_validate(char *buf, u32 *data, struct rdt_resource *r)
>    * Read one cache bit mask (hex). Check that it is valid for the current
>    * resource type.
>    */
> -int parse_cbm(struct rdt_parse_data *data, struct resctrl_schema *s,
> -	      struct rdt_domain *d)
> +static int parse_cbm(struct rdt_parse_data *data, struct resctrl_schema *s,
> +		     struct rdt_domain *d)
>   {
>   	struct rdtgroup *rdtgrp = data->rdtgrp;
>   	struct resctrl_staged_config *cfg;
> @@ -195,6 +204,14 @@ int parse_cbm(struct rdt_parse_data *data, struct resctrl_schema *s,
>   	return 0;
>   }
>   
> +static ctrlval_parser_t *get_parser(struct rdt_resource *res)
> +{
> +	if (res->fflags & RFTYPE_RES_CACHE)
> +		return &parse_cbm;
> +	else
> +		return &parse_bw;
> +}

Besides what Reinette said, I'd have added here something that would 
fire in case someone adds something unexpected in the future, like

WARN_ON_ONCE(!(res->fflags & (RFTYPE_RES_CACHE|RFTYPE_RES_MB));

At the beginning of the function.


Apart from that, nothing jumped at me.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb