netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v6 01/23] asm: simd context helper API

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: <CAKv+Gu9FAVVOiYyGovYZ19-107_6sK9Ya6LnK=AQkTgctMmu5A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 28 Sep 2018 16:00:47 +0200
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Samuel Neves <sneves@....uc.pt>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 01/23] asm: simd context helper API

On 28 September 2018 at 15:59, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 3:58 PM Ard Biesheuvel
> <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 28 September 2018 at 15:47, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:49 AM Ard Biesheuvel
>> > <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
>> >> >> +typedef enum {
>> >> >> +       HAVE_NO_SIMD = 1 << 0,
>> >> >> +       HAVE_FULL_SIMD = 1 << 1,
>> >> >> +       HAVE_SIMD_IN_USE = 1 << 31
>> >> >> +} simd_context_t;
>> >> >> +
>> >>
>> >> Oh, and another thing (and I'm surprised checkpatch.pl didn't complain
>> >> about it): the use of typedef in new code is strongly discouraged.
>> >> This policy predates my involvement, so perhaps Joe can elaborate on
>> >> the rationale?
>> >
>> > In case it matters, the motivation for making this a typedef is I
>> > could imagine this at some point turning into a more complicated
>> > struct on certain platforms and that would make refactoring easier. I
>> > could just make it `struct simd_context` now with 1 member though...
>>
>> Yes that makes sense
>
> The rationale for it being a typedef or moving to a struct now?

Yes just switch to a struct.