From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Erick Archer <erick.archer@outlook.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Prefer struct_size over open coded arithmetic
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:18:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240430091833.GD40213@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202404291013.B21EADD4F@keescook>
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 10:18:03AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Peter and Ingo, you seem to traditionally take these changes (via -tip)?
> Can you please pick this up?
I have been explicitly not taking these things for perf and sched for a
while now. As I wrote in that other mail, I detest struct_size(), it
obfuscates code for no real benefit afaict.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-30 9:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-30 14:32 [PATCH] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Prefer struct_size over open coded arithmetic Erick Archer
2024-04-27 13:47 ` Erick Archer
2024-04-29 17:18 ` Kees Cook
2024-04-30 9:18 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2024-05-11 13:33 ` Erick Archer
Reply instructions:
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:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240430091833.GD40213@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=erick.archer@outlook.com \
--cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* 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