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: <f200b7dc72a5ca2d0e14b1a597d1757e21c80f36.camel@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 16:03:16 +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>,
	"tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com" <tony.lindgren@...ux.intel.com>, "Chatre,
 Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>, "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com"
	<binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>, "kas@...nel.org"
	<kas@...nel.org>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.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 Wed, 2025-07-23 at 18:41 +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> 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.

No. It could be easily done upfront. Just rename everything and remove the
comment if you want to go with the rename option. Justification: Make code
readable instead of having comments to explain confusing code. Then put a little
bit saying that future changes will make it optional so it's nice to have the
name.