linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 1/2] x86/tdx: Eliminate duplicate code in tdx_clear

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: <4b7190de91c59a5d5b3fdbb39174e4e48c69f9e7.camel@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 14:44:06 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>, "Hunter, Adrian"
	<adrian.hunter@...el.com>, "Annapurve, Vishal" <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
	"seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>, "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com"
	<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "Li, Xiaoyao"
	<xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "Zhao, Yan Y"
	<yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com" <tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com>, "Chatre,
 Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>, "kas@...nel.org" <kas@...nel.org>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Yamahata, Isaku"
	<isaku.yamahata@...el.com>, "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com"
	<binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "Gao,
 Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/2] x86/tdx: Eliminate duplicate code in
 tdx_clear_page()

On Wed, 2025-07-23 at 17:37 +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> > The latter seems better to me for the sake of less churn.
> 
> Why make tdx_quirk_reset_page() and tdx_quirk_reset_paddr() follow
> different rules.
> 
> How about this:
> 
> From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] x86/tdx: Tidy reset_pamt functions
> 
> Rename reset_pamt functions to contain "quirk" to reflect the new
> functionality, and remove the now misleading comment.

This looks like the "former" option. Churn is not too bad, and it has the
benefit of clear code vs long comment. I'm ok either way. But it needs to go
cleanup first in the patch order.

The log should explain why it's ok to change now, with respect to the reasoning
in the comment that is being removed.