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: <d51c28a3-bbaa-470f-a07a-5706cb5a4b90@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 18:41:51 +0300
From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, "pbonzini@...hat.com"
	<pbonzini@...hat.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>,
	"tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com" <tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com"
	<binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "kas@...nel.org" <kas@...nel.org>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Yamahata, Isaku"
	<isaku.yamahata@...el.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Chatre, Reinette"
	<reinette.chatre@...el.com>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.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 23/07/2025 18:33, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-07-23 at 18:30 +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>>> The log should explain why it's ok to change now, with respect to the
>>> reasoning
>>> in the comment that is being removed.
>>
>> It makes more sense afterwards because then it can refer to the
>> functional change:
> 
> Cleanups first is the norm. This doesn't seem like a special situation. Did you
> try to re-arrange it?

Patch 1 only introduced "quirk" terminology to save touching the
same lines of code in patch 2 and distracting from its main purpose,
but the quirk functionality is not added until patch 2, so the
tidy-up only really makes sense afterwards.