linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 08/16] riscv: add ISA parsing for Zca, Zcf, Zcd and Zcb

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, 30 May 2024 14:13:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
To: cleger@...osinc.com
CC: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>, corbet@....net,
  Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, aou@...s.berkeley.edu, robh@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
  anup@...infault.org, shuah@...nel.org, atishp@...shpatra.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
  linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
  kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject:     Re: [PATCH v5 08/16] riscv: add ISA parsing for Zca, Zcf, Zcd and Zcb

On Wed, 22 May 2024 00:20:09 PDT (-0700), cleger@...osinc.com wrote:
>
>
> On 21/05/2024 21:49, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 04:52:48PM +0200, Clément Léger wrote:
>>
>>> +static int riscv_ext_zca_depends(const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *data,
>>> +				 const unsigned long *isa_bitmap)
>>> +{
>>> +	return __riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCA) ? 0 : -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>> +}
>>> +static int riscv_ext_zcd_validate(const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *data,
>>> +				  const unsigned long *isa_bitmap)
>>> +{
>>> +	return __riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCA) &&
>>> +	       __riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_d) ? 0 : -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>> +}
>>
>> Could you write the logic in these out normally please? I think they'd
>> be more understandable (particular this second one) broken down and with
>> early return.
>
> Yes sure. I'll probably make the same thing for zcf_validate as well as
> removing the #ifdef and using IS_ENABLED():
>
> static int riscv_ext_zcf_validate(const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *data,
> 				  const unsigned long *isa_bitmap)
> {
> 	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_64BIT))
> 		return -EINVAL;
>
> 	if (__riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCA) &&
> 	    __riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_f))
> 	       return 0;
>
> 	return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> }

Are you going to send a v6 (sorry if I missed it, I'm trying to untangle 
all these ISA parsing patch sets).

>
>>
>> Otherwise,
>> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Conor.