linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/9] nfp: Call FIELD_PREP() in NFP_ETH_SET_BIT

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: <20251210100458.57620549@pumpkin>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2025 10:04:58 +0000
From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>, Rasmus Villemoes
 <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
 Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>, Jonathan Cameron
 <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, Crt Mori <cmo@...exis.com>, Richard Genoud
 <richard.genoud@...tlin.com>, Andy Shevchenko
 <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>, Luo Jie <quic_luoj@...cinc.com>, Peter
 Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S . Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>, Mika
 Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>, Andreas Noever
 <andreas.noever@...il.com>, Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@...il.com>,
 Nicolas Frattaroli <nicolas.frattaroli@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] nfp: Call FIELD_PREP() in NFP_ETH_SET_BIT_CONFIG()
 wrapper

On Wed, 10 Dec 2025 18:29:47 +0900
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Tue,  9 Dec 2025 10:03:05 +0000 david.laight.linux@...il.com wrote:
> > Rather than use a define that should be internal to the implementation
> > of FIELD_PREP(), pass the shifted 'val' to nfp_eth_set_bit_config()
> > and change the test for 'value unchanged' to match.
> > 
> > This is a simpler change than the one used to avoid calling both
> > FIELD_GET() and FIELD_PREP() with non-constant mask values.  
> 
> I'd like this code to be left out of the subjective churn please.
> I like it the way I wrote it.

The 'problem' is that I want to remove __BF_FIELD_CHECK().
It has already been split into two (for 6.19) but it makes sense
to split into three (to avoid code-bloat in the cpp output).

IMHO Using a define that is part of the implementation of FIELD_xxxx()
is wrong anyway.

> I also liked the bitfield.h the way
> I wrote it but I guess that part "belongs" to the community at large.

There are already significant changes there for 6.19-rc1

	David

> 
> FWIW - thumbs up for patch 8, no opinion on the rest.