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: <20250103105008.000053bc@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2025 10:50:08 +0000
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Alejandro Lucero Palau <alucerop@....com>
CC: <alejandro.lucero-palau@....com>, <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, <edward.cree@....com>,
	<davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	<edumazet@...gle.com>, <dave.jiang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 03/27] cxl: add capabilities field to cxl_dev_state
 and cxl_port

On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 07:20:48 +0000
Alejandro Lucero Palau <alucerop@....com> wrote:

> On 1/2/25 14:36, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Dec 2024 21:44:21 +0000
> > <alejandro.lucero-palau@....com> wrote:
> >  
> >> From: Alejandro Lucero <alucerop@....com>
> >>
> >> Type2 devices have some Type3 functionalities as optional like an mbox
> >> or an hdm decoder, and CXL core needs a way to know what an CXL accelerator
> >> implements.
> >>
> >> Add a new field to cxl_dev_state for keeping device capabilities as
> >> discovered during initialization. Add same field to cxl_port as registers
> >> discovery is also used during port initialization.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Lucero <alucerop@....com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Ben Cheatham <benjamin.cheatham@....com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Fan Ni <fan.ni@...sung.com>  
> > Comment in thread on v8.  I don't see a reason to have any specific
> > bitmap length - just use a final entry in the enum without a value set
> > to let us know how long it actually is.  
> 
> 
> I could do this but it implies to clear/zeroing the bitmaps with the 
> final entry value and to mask bitmaps with that when comparing them.

Yes but that is automatic if you use the bitmap functions throughout.

> 
> I tried to avoid the masking, and it led to that use of sizeof and then 
> CXL_MAX_CAPS=64.

Don't avoid it. You are creating maintenance pain for a bit of unnecessary
micro optimization.  Just make sure to treat this bitmap as a bitmap
in all paths and there will be not reason for a reviewer to ever have
to care what this value is and whether enough bits are zero etc.

Jonathan




> 
> 
> > Using the bit / bitmap functions should work fine without constraining
> > that to any particular value - also allowing for greater than 64 entries
> > with no need to fix up call sites etc.
> >
> >  
> >> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/regs.c b/drivers/cxl/core/regs.c
> >> index 59cb35b40c7e..144ae9eb6253 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/regs.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/regs.c
> >> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> >> +enum cxl_dev_cap {
> >> +	/* capabilities from Component Registers */
> >> +	CXL_DEV_CAP_RAS,
> >> +	CXL_DEV_CAP_HDM,
> >> +	/* capabilities from Device Registers */
> >> +	CXL_DEV_CAP_DEV_STATUS,
> >> +	CXL_DEV_CAP_MAILBOX_PRIMARY,
> >> +	CXL_DEV_CAP_MEMDEV,
> >> +	CXL_MAX_CAPS = 64  
> > As in v8. I'm not seeing any reason for this.  If you need
> > a bitmap to be a particular number of unsigned longs, then that
> > code should be fixed. (only exception being compile time constant
> > bitmaps where this is tricky to do!)
> >
> > Obviously I replied with that to v8 after you posted this
> > so time machines aside no way you could have acted on it yet.
> >
> >
> > Jonathan
> >  
> >> +};
> >> +
> >>   struct cxl_dev_state;
> >>   struct device;
> >>     


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ