linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 02/11] KVM: x86: Relax locking for kvm_test_age_gfn and kvm_age

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]

Message-ID: <20240830202228.GB3468552@ziepe.ca>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 17:22:28 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: James Houghton <jthoughton@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	Ankit Agrawal <ankita@...dia.com>,
	Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@....com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
	Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
	Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@...gle.com>,
	Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>,
	Shaoqin Huang <shahuang@...hat.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
	Wei Xu <weixugc@...gle.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
	Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>, Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@...wei.com>,
	kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 02/11] KVM: x86: Relax locking for kvm_test_age_gfn
 and kvm_age_gfn

On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 10:09:30AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2024, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 08:47:59PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2024, James Houghton wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 6:05 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
> > > > > > +static __always_inline bool kvm_tdp_mmu_handle_gfn_lockless(
> > > > > > +             struct kvm *kvm,
> > > > > > +             struct kvm_gfn_range *range,
> > > > > > +             tdp_handler_t handler)
> > > > >
> > > > > Please burn all the Google3 from your brain, and code ;-)
> > > > 
> > > > I indented this way to avoid going past the 80 character limit. I've
> > > > adjusted it to be more like the other functions in this file.
> > > > 
> > > > Perhaps I should put `static __always_inline bool` on its own line?
> > > 
> > > Noooo. Do not wrap before the function name.  Linus has a nice explanation/rant
> > > on this[1].
> > 
> > IMHO, run clang-format on your stuff and just be happy with 99% of
> > what it spits out. Saves *so much time* and usually arguing..
> 
> Heh, nope, not bending on this one.  The time I spend far hunting for implementations
> because of wraps before the function name far exceeds the time it takes me to
> push back on these warts in review.

clangd solved that problem for me :)

Jason