linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/15] acpi/ghes: move offset calculus to a separate function

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: <20240926130348.00005e45@Huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 13:03:48 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
CC: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>, Shiju Jose <shiju.jose@...wei.com>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Ani Sinha <anisinha@...hat.com>,
	Dongjiu Geng <gengdongjiu1@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<qemu-arm@...gnu.org>, <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/15] acpi/ghes: move offset calculus to a separate
 function

On Wed, 25 Sep 2024 06:04:15 +0200
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org> wrote:

> Currently, CPER address location is calculated as an offset of
> the hardware_errors table. It is also badly named, as the
> offset actually used is the address where the CPER data starts,
> and not the beginning of the error source.
> 
> Move the logic which calculates such offset to a separate
> function, in preparation for a patch that will be changing the
> logic to calculate it from the HEST table.
> 
> While here, properly name the variable which stores the cper
> address.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
Trivial comment inline.

Given this is a placeholder for more radical refactor I'll not comment on
the maths etc being less flexible than it will hopefully end up!

Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>

>  void ghes_record_cper_errors(const void *cper, size_t len,
>                               uint16_t source_id, Error **errp)
>  {

> -    /*
> -     * As the current version supports only one source, the ack offset is
> -     * just sizeof(uint64_t).
> -     */
> -    read_ack_register_addr = start_addr + sizeof(uint64_t);
> -
>      cpu_physical_memory_read(read_ack_register_addr,
> -                                &read_ack_register, sizeof(read_ack_register));
> +                             &read_ack_register, sizeof(read_ack_register));
>  

Wrong patch for this alignment tidy up?

Or are my eyes deceiving me and there is more going on here...

J