From: Mark Rutland <email@example.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,
email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] arm64: alternatives: make alt_region const
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 13:13:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yx8iTiZ09etSd4ta@FVFF77S0Q05N> (raw)
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 11:13:12AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Sept 2022 at 10:32, Mark Rutland <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 05:18:54PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > Hi Mark,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 1 Sept 2022 at 17:14, Mark Rutland <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We never alter a struct alt_region after creation, and we open-code the
> > > > bounds of the kernel alternatives region in two functions.
> > > >
> > > > This patch adds a shared struct alt_region, and marks the alt regions as
> > > > const to prevent unintentional modification.
> > > >
> > >
> > > What is the point of struct alt_region? Can we just get rid of it
> > > entirely? It seems its only purpose is to carry a <start, end> tuple
> > > that could easily be converted into start and end arguments to
> > > __apply_alternatives().
> > We could right now, but I'm intending to fix some noinstr issues (and make
> > debugging easier) by splitting the alternatives sanity-checking & patching into
> > distinct initcalls (alnog with some extra debug), and having the structure for
> > the common definition is quite nice to avoid open-coding the start and end
> > value in a bunch of places.
> > So I'd prefer to keep it for now, but I can follow up and delete it if the
> > above doesn't turn out to need it, if that's ok?
> Yeah, that's fine. The above wasn't really clear to me from the
> context you provided.
True; I'll add a note to the commit message.
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-12 12:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-01 15:13 [PATCH 0/9] arm64: alternatives: improvements Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:13 ` [PATCH 1/9] arm64: cpufeature: make cpus_have_cap() noinstr-safe Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:13 ` [PATCH 2/9] arm64: alternatives: kvm: prepare for cap changes Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:13 ` [PATCH 3/9] arm64: alternatives: proton-pack: " Mark Rutland
2022-09-02 16:19 ` Joey Gouly
2022-09-05 8:46 ` Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:13 ` [PATCH 4/9] arm64: alternatives: hoist print out of __apply_alternatives() Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:13 ` [PATCH 5/9] arm64: alternatives: make alt_region const Mark Rutland
2022-09-06 15:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-09-12 9:31 ` Mark Rutland
2022-09-12 10:13 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-09-12 12:13 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2022-09-01 15:14 ` [PATCH 6/9] arm64: alternatives: have callbacks take a cap Mark Rutland
2022-09-02 15:54 ` Joey Gouly
2022-09-05 8:48 ` Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:14 ` [PATCH 7/9] arm64: alternatives: add alternative_has_feature_*() Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:14 ` [PATCH 8/9] arm64: alternatives: add shared NOP callback Mark Rutland
2022-09-01 15:14 ` [PATCH 9/9] HACK: arm64: alternatives: dump summary of alternatives Mark Rutland
2022-09-12 12:36 ` Mark Brown
2022-09-12 16:14 ` Mark Rutland
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).