linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 03/18] cxl/pci: cxl_hdm_decode

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: <Z8ltCiUCSagkpa9g@rric.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 10:38:18 +0100
From: Robert Richter <rrichter@....com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Cc: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
	Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
	Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Gregory Price <gourry@...rry.net>,
	"Fabio M. De Francesco" <fabio.m.de.francesco@...ux.intel.com>,
	Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/18] cxl/pci: cxl_hdm_decode_init: Move comment

On 14.02.25 15:49:55, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 01:35:29 +0100
> Robert Richter <rrichter@....com> wrote:
> > On 12.02.25 18:09:10, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 10:53:33 +0100
> > > Robert Richter <rrichter@....com> wrote:

> > > > +	/*
> > > > +	 * Per CXL 2.0 Section 8.1.3.8.3 and 8.1.3.8.4 DVSEC CXL Range 1 Base
> > > > +	 * [High,Low] when HDM operation is enabled the range register values
> > > > +	 * are ignored by the device, but the spec also recommends matching the
> > > > +	 * DVSEC Range 1,2 to HDM Decoder Range 0,1. So, non-zero info->ranges
> > > > +	 * are expected even though Linux does not require or maintain that
> > > > +	 * match. If at least one DVSEC range is enabled and allowed, skip HDM
> > > > +	 * Decoder Capability Enable.  
> > > 
> > > This check is about mem_enabled. Would be fine to add another comment here to
> > > say.  
> > 
> > The next patch extends the comment for more clarification (I hope so).
> 
> Not to me.  It says 'else' when referring to what happens in the if.

I have dropped this patch and updated the comments in the next patch
along with the patch description.

-Robert