From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759511AbdJQQc4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:32:56 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.14]:62252 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753081AbdJQQcx (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:32:53 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] char-TPM: Adjustments for ten function implementations To: James Bottomley , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: Dan Carpenter , Jarkko Sakkinen , Andy Shevchenko , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Corentin Labbe , Jason Gunthorpe , Jerry Snitselaar , Kenneth Goldman , Michael Ellerman , Nayna Jain , Paul Mackerras , =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_H=c3=bcwe?= , Stefan Berger , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org References: <1d3516a2-a8e6-9e95-d438-f115fac84c7f@users.sourceforge.net> <20171016183139.otyh3m5c5yurtmow@linux.intel.com> <20171016183512.3bz6x4b6lbhpbkje@linux.intel.com> <20171017085124.pkrjzghcf5wmcydc@mwanda> <1508255833.3129.33.camel@HansenPartnership.com> From: SF Markus Elfring Message-ID: <5cf54c5a-778f-3f00-8772-547785c22009@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 18:32:16 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1508255833.3129.33.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:I9RHOza6nOcIQcltOaDh2NiXChm7dRodT07PGRlnrHRPk5zahXD nN4mlpln16ulAyd4fjpIM2f7xFarbymrxNhayNvQGfYLVJVbZT27OhovQm/6P/L4l3oai2c yH/2VuTcur5RzSLAc9J/Vs/bzJqqLgsteS+IxMpXdko3yPAuEH9mkIvQe+2hqDiPIM/TH7g 9Ly3qSExy7ldBKlOOD3ig== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:EAJQtz0XJxk=:tU4bhOBLRdiWgQJ1X0wT9E kRQ1ImRH6S1M9Qj/GqGnQIWDtUpK/ym3DqbajFYXENmEpMnTMPe/Kzhp9eH3ParHO/PjHthoq iDbSUl3pXB8cK/PN+R02foZehELeC02ah7h4hVibqmEgcFCZUhH9gltn71KhRtF5saTFxZq2Q lTn7hAWjog10aPx85M/oW+JlL7itoYcZIEkvqAZHY1JwDJQpUb3K2k/Yw0Y4dV5F/Nf1jMhHr Se8jgosFuKt/Sizy0XqrrUeLPvSzjAz67DF4NVpA96DoKF7YhXoGlBymi783fH9Y7Hl4a6AsC ABcs4VAACGhyROSo84A1hDMYplgtxCwj7syEFWP+hbZV6InBMT7t9f7uZGC/XKDfdZIqeuYD2 OKEUUbAdMjCtdoCnORfol/jFpQtunAqXJ+IIgUgF/Ml+TGr1g0No1htIGNheMBN/CWOhJ2JZw E6hbfvekOD7e4ELGmdeer4g/x1u4tA329s6UnxpVswM91EbE93GEM+mVQjTd9eE+mvoo2fa5+ yfAg1RY8LGpiT3LEouZ9OJUtZyDQtgyt6bn9cZTRARkZj6xTCwH6sQEE0ppD5LDx2cqE7GBDr P10VSxIcKMOqzPX9vPBxsKap3DK2VMlaGkdCjgk1yz6MFE87sVNHahfdkmPGp1UZBjVhSxc1y asX+BTOOOaEM7QR2ilPLWY6BHlFTdhtzA4Lsa/WdDi0T5g+3Rx7h/OBWoJHcvgLRnocIZRmjf kHAyiu0tPiwaqPVeLt1B9/uYKcdsOzyvvIged3yAH/v8TC1lDThbId0XK/wSr+WRCshowsnob 8tC5Qu20gPd7jemozvjtZwQdGLtV+7oqVfMV/IG8kOshtTSZKM= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>> Fixes is only for bug fixes.  These don't fix any bugs. >> >> How do you distinguish these in questionable source code >> from other error categories or software weaknesses? > > A style change is one that doesn't change the effect of the execution. This can occasionally be fine, can't it? >  These don't actually even change the assembly, How did you check it? I would expect that there are useful run time effects to consider for three proposed update steps (in this patch series). > so there's programmatic proof they're not fixing anything. I find that the software refactoring “Improve a size determination in nine functions” should fit to this observation (while the source code can become a bit better). > Bug means potentially user visible fault. Thanks for your constructive feedback. Regards, Markus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 16:32:16 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] char-TPM: Adjustments for ten function implementations Message-Id: <5cf54c5a-778f-3f00-8772-547785c22009@users.sourceforge.net> List-Id: References: <1d3516a2-a8e6-9e95-d438-f115fac84c7f@users.sourceforge.net> <20171016183139.otyh3m5c5yurtmow@linux.intel.com> <20171016183512.3bz6x4b6lbhpbkje@linux.intel.com> <20171017085124.pkrjzghcf5wmcydc@mwanda> <1508255833.3129.33.camel@HansenPartnership.com> In-Reply-To: <1508255833.3129.33.camel@HansenPartnership.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: James Bottomley , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: Dan Carpenter , Jarkko Sakkinen , Andy Shevchenko , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Corentin Labbe , Jason Gunthorpe , Jerry Snitselaar , Kenneth Goldman , Michael Ellerman , Nayna Jain , Paul Mackerras , =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_H=c3=bcwe?= , Stefan Berger , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org >>> Fixes is only for bug fixes.  These don't fix any bugs. >> >> How do you distinguish these in questionable source code >> from other error categories or software weaknesses? > > A style change is one that doesn't change the effect of the execution. This can occasionally be fine, can't it? >  These don't actually even change the assembly, How did you check it? I would expect that there are useful run time effects to consider for three proposed update steps (in this patch series). > so there's programmatic proof they're not fixing anything. I find that the software refactoring “Improve a size determination in nine functions” should fit to this observation (while the source code can become a bit better). > Bug means potentially user visible fault. Thanks for your constructive feedback. Regards, Markus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.14]:62252 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753081AbdJQQcx (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:32:53 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] char-TPM: Adjustments for ten function implementations To: James Bottomley , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: Dan Carpenter , Jarkko Sakkinen , Andy Shevchenko , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Corentin Labbe , Jason Gunthorpe , Jerry Snitselaar , Kenneth Goldman , Michael Ellerman , Nayna Jain , Paul Mackerras , =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_H=c3=bcwe?= , Stefan Berger , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org References: <1d3516a2-a8e6-9e95-d438-f115fac84c7f@users.sourceforge.net> <20171016183139.otyh3m5c5yurtmow@linux.intel.com> <20171016183512.3bz6x4b6lbhpbkje@linux.intel.com> <20171017085124.pkrjzghcf5wmcydc@mwanda> <1508255833.3129.33.camel@HansenPartnership.com> From: SF Markus Elfring Message-ID: <5cf54c5a-778f-3f00-8772-547785c22009@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 18:32:16 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1508255833.3129.33.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: >>> Fixes is only for bug fixes. These don't fix any bugs. >> >> How do you distinguish these in questionable source code >> from other error categories or software weaknesses? > > A style change is one that doesn't change the effect of the execution. This can occasionally be fine, can't it? > These don't actually even change the assembly, How did you check it? I would expect that there are useful run time effects to consider for three proposed update steps (in this patch series). > so there's programmatic proof they're not fixing anything. I find that the software refactoring "Improve a size determination in nine functions" should fit to this observation (while the source code can become a bit better). > Bug means potentially user visible fault. Thanks for your constructive feedback. Regards, Markus