linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] x86/microcode/intel: Implement staging handler

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]

Message-ID: <cf1e2b8e-2cb1-4477-8bf4-f8e0ff55b79f@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 14:19:27 -0700
From: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <x86@...nel.org>, <tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>,
	<bp@...en8.de>, <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <colinmitchell@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] x86/microcode/intel: Implement staging handler

On 3/20/2025 5:15 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> 
> Yeah, it means passing around _one_ function argument to a function
> that's not currently taking an argument. But it makes it a heck of a lot
> more clear what is going on. It also makes the lifetime and
> initialization state of 'staging' *MUCH* more obvious.

I see -- that seemed like a case of over-simplification.

I've updated the relevant patches after passing the staging test. I've 
also thought reordering patches (patch2 <-> patch3), perhaps when 
posting v3.

Thanks,
Chang