linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: Rename bts_buffer variables and use struct

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: <f93c3fef-8e30-408d-9f2f-e833cfb7b1a6@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 11:40:22 -0400
From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@...ux.dev>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
 <acme@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
 Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
 Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
 Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, Thomas Gleixner
 <tglx@...utronix.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
 Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
 linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: Rename bts_buffer variables and use
 struct_size()

+ Dapeng

On 2025-04-01 10:20 a.m., Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 02:29:38PM +0200, Thorsten Blum wrote:
>> Rename struct bts_buffer objects from 'buf' to 'bb' to improve the
>> readability when accessing the structure's 'buf' member. For example,
>> 'buf->buf[]' becomes 'bb->buf[]'.
>>
>> Use struct_size() to calculate the number of bytes to allocate for a new
>> bts_buffer. Compared to offsetof(), struct_size() provides additional
>> compile-time checks (e.g., __must_be_array()).
>>
>> Indent line 327 using tabs to silence a checkpatch warning.
>>
>> No functional changes intended.
> 
> This is two things, as such should be two patches. Also, meh. This is
> going to create extra work for the arch-pebs guys I suppose.
> 

I think the patch only changes the internal variables, while the
arch-pebs only touch the external interfaces. It should be less effort
to re-base.

Thanks,
Kan