linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/1] *** Replace KLP_* to KLP_TRANSITION

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 20:29:25 -0700
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
To: zhang warden <zhangwarden@...il.com>
Cc: mbenes@...e.cz, jikos@...nel.org, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
	Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>,
	live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] *** Replace KLP_* to KLP_TRANSITION_* ***

On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 10:56:09AM +0800, zhang warden wrote:
> 
> 
> > On May 7, 2024, at 10:41, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 10:21:40AM +0800, zhang warden wrote:
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> 
> >>> transition state. With this marcos renamed, comments are not 
> >>> necessary at this point.
> >>> 
> >> Sorry for my careless, the comment still remains in the code. However,
> >> comment in the code do no harms here. Maybe it can be kept.
> > 
> > The comments aren't actually correct.
> > 
> > For example, KLP_TRANSITION_UNPATCHED doesn't always mean "transitioning
> > to unpatched state".  Sometimes it means "transitioning *from* unpatched
> > state".
> > 
> > -- 
> > Josh
> 
> OK, I got it. I will remove the comment later. After all, comment is
> not necessary at this point after we rename the macros.

Yeah, removing them altogether might be best, as the meaning of these
can vary slightly depending on the operation (patching vs unpatching),
and also depending on where it's stored (task->patch_state vs klp_target_state).

-- 
Josh