linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 03/16] x86/virt/tdx: Simplify tdmr_get_pamt

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: <f495fed769914a476bace0fd7eb58bebd933f6af.camel@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 19:47:55 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com" <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev"
	<linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>, "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "Li,
 Xiaoyao" <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	"Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, "Wu, Binbin" <binbin.wu@...el.com>,
	"kas@...nel.org" <kas@...nel.org>, "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>, "tglx@...utronix.de"
	<tglx@...utronix.de>, "Annapurve, Vishal" <vannapurve@...gle.com>, "Gao,
 Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "x86@...nel.org"
	<x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/16] x86/virt/tdx: Simplify tdmr_get_pamt_sz()

On Mon, 2025-11-24 at 17:26 +0800, Binbin Wu wrote:
> Reviewed-by: Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>

Thanks.

> 
> One nit below.
> 
> [...]
> > @@ -535,26 +518,18 @@ static int tdmr_set_up_pamt(struct tdmr_info *tdmr,
> >    	 * in overlapped TDMRs.
> >    	 */
> >    	pamt = alloc_contig_pages(tdmr_pamt_size >> PAGE_SHIFT, GFP_KERNEL,
> > -			nid, &node_online_map);
> > -	if (!pamt)
> > +				  nid, &node_online_map);
> > +	if (!pamt) {
> > +		/*
> > +		 * tdmr->pamt_4k_base is zero so the
> > +		 * error path will skip freeing.
> > +		 */
> >    		return -ENOMEM;
> Nit:
> Do you think it's OK to move the comment up so to avoid multiple lines of
> comments as well as the curly braces?

Yea, I think that is a good point. But I'm also thinking that this comment is
not clear enough. There is no error path to speak of in this function, so maybe:

	/*
	 * tdmr->pamt_4k_base is still zero so the error 
	 * path of the caller will skip freeing the pamt.
	 */

If you agree I will keep your RB.

> 
>          /* tdmr->pamt_4k_base is zero so the error path will skip freeing. */
>          if (!pamt)
>              return -ENOMEM;