Re: [PATCH v6 1/6] mm/memblock: Tag memblocks with crypto capabilities

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2/3/22, Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 01:43:23PM -0300, Martin Fernandez wrote:
>> +/**
>> + * memblock_node_is_crypto_capable - get if whole node is capable
>> + * of encryption
>> + * @nid: number of node
>> + *
>> + * Iterate over all memory memblock_type and find if all regions under
>> + * node @nid are capable of hardware encryption.
>> + *
>> + * Return:
>> + * true if every region in memory memblock_type is capable of
>> + * encryption, false otherwise.
>> + */
>> +bool __init_memblock memblock_node_is_crypto_capable(int nid)
>> +{
>> +	struct memblock_region *region;
>> +	bool crypto_capable = false;
>> +	bool not_crypto_capable = false;
>> +
>> +	for_each_mem_region(region) {
>> +		if (memblock_get_region_node(region) == nid) {
>> +			crypto_capable =
>> +				crypto_capable ||
>> +				(region->flags & MEMBLOCK_CRYPTO_CAPABLE);
>> +			not_crypto_capable =
>> +				not_crypto_capable ||
>> +				!(region->flags & MEMBLOCK_CRYPTO_CAPABLE);
>
> Isn't
>
>  			if (region->flags & MEMBLOCK_CRYPTO_CAPABLE)
> 				crypto_capable++;
> 			else
> 				not_crypto_capable++;
>
> simpler and clearer?
>
> (of course s/bool/int in the declaration)
>

Yes! It is. I like that.

>> +		}
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (crypto_capable && not_crypto_capable)
>> +		pr_warn_once("Node %d has regions that are encryptable and regions that
>> aren't",
>> +			     nid);
>
> This will print only the first node with mixed regions. With a single
> caller of memblock_node_is_crypto_capable() I think pr_warn() is ok.
>

Yes, you are correct, don't really want _once here.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux