On 2/8/22, Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 01:45:40PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 01:43:25PM -0300, Martin Fernandez wrote: >> > __e820__range_update and e820__range_remove had a very similar >> > implementation with a few lines different from each other, the lines >> > that actually perform the modification over the e820_table. The >> > similiraties were found in the checks for the different cases on how >> > each entry intersects with the given range (if it does at all). These >> > checks were very presice and error prone so it was not a good idea to >> > have them in both places. >> >> Yay removing copy/paste code! :) > > Removing copy/paste is nice but diffstat of > > arch/x86/kernel/e820.c | 383 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 283 insertions(+), 100 deletions(-) > > does not look nice even accounting for lots of comments :( > > I didn't look closely, but diffstat clues that the refactoring making > things much more complex. > Yes, that diffstat surprised me as well. I have to mention that 110 of those lines are kerneldocs and blank lines, which is quite a lot. Also you have to take into account that I expanded most of the function definitions for better formatting, which also took some space. And as I was able to focus the "hard" part of the problem into a single function, testing can be done easily as Kees suggested and I'm planning to do so in the next patch.
