linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 4/9] x86/cpuid: Rename hypervisor_cpuid_base() to cpuid_hypervisor

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: <aCYY7CE57Al9ydWa@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 18:40:12 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwi@...utronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
	x86-cpuid@...ts.linux.dev, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/9] x86/cpuid: Rename hypervisor_cpuid_base() to
 cpuid_hypervisor_base()


* Ahmed S. Darwish <darwi@...utronix.de> wrote:

> In order to let all the APIs under <cpuid/api.h> have a shared "cpuid_"
> namespace, rename hypervisor_cpuid_base() to cpuid_hypervisor_base().
> 
> To align with the new style, also rename:
> 
>     for_each_possible_hypervisor_cpuid_base(function)
> 
> to:
> 
>     for_each_possible_cpuid_hypervisor_base(function)
> 
> Adjust all call-sites accordingly.
> 
> Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Ahmed S. Darwish <darwi@...utronix.de>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/acrn.h           | 2 +-
>  arch/x86/include/asm/cpuid/api.h      | 6 +++---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypervisor.h | 2 +-
>  arch/x86/kernel/jailhouse.c           | 2 +-
>  arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c                 | 2 +-
>  arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c                  | 2 +-
>  6 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

> -#define for_each_possible_hypervisor_cpuid_base(function) \
> +#define for_each_possible_cpuid_hypervisor_base(function) \
>  	for (function = 0x40000000; function < 0x40010000; function += 0x100)


> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypervisor.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypervisor.h
> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ extern struct start_info *xen_start_info;
>  
>  static inline uint32_t xen_cpuid_base(void)
>  {
> -	return hypervisor_cpuid_base(XEN_SIGNATURE, 2);
> +	return cpuid_hypervisor_base(XEN_SIGNATURE, 2);
>  }

So the interaction here looks a bit weird IMO (what is a 'hypervisor 
base'?), and I think the 'CPUID base' phrase should be immutable.

Ie. I think it would be more natural to call this method 
cpuid_base_hypervisor(), which would mix reasonably well with:

	kvm_cpuid_base()
	xen_cpuid_base()
	jailhouse_cpuid_base()

These lower level methods are prefixed with kvm_/xen_/jailhouse_, as 
most of their internal methods are.

Likewise, for_each_possible_cpuid_base_hypervisor()?

Thanks,

	Ingo