From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F64EC433F5 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:10:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1351932AbiDZPNR (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Apr 2022 11:13:17 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50474 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1351918AbiDZPL7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Apr 2022 11:11:59 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D62F161BB7; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 08:08:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1650985702; x=1682521702; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=j2V5+3CZNEUZjk60xmVPNepccy31dj0aymHOLGJ7vBI=; b=XWm3AW2MQuj0gLHrqbeZHigmbhllG/SEEGEcAPoOQLv6vY3B2JelNnrE 3ecLFFWkuNAvuOM5DGWZIhOtvXMyPRN0b1/mIZl9xaM4nJq/tUKzpl56W dSFowNBXnK8LBatx4aWo07dvdfSly1avO+I4BrVGGSxbQ3g0c3nR9bf4y XJNaGuEx5765gMfARJqP+QtZt/Qp0XhVd/+Mu2+k14SrC4gKdi2MtabET Dlo9qrUiIZauICQ+gtO9cg49aBfKsD3qM4Unejy3AZmMNvj3yhNU4OrFY gukKvazZwUoRP8i6WGWXiLQrscAhofQt2YChYV51GoXmZluOKonCaZ2Vy A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10328"; a="265129903" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,291,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="265129903" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Apr 2022 08:08:21 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,291,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="595802962" Received: from dsocek-mobl2.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.212.69.119]) ([10.212.69.119]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Apr 2022 08:08:20 -0700 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 08:10:58 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] x86/e820: Refactor e820__range_remove Content-Language: en-US To: Martin Fernandez , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, ardb@kernel.org, dvhart@infradead.org, andy@infradead.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, rafael@kernel.org, rppt@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, daniel.gutson@eclypsium.com, hughsient@gmail.com, alex.bazhaniuk@eclypsium.com, alison.schofield@intel.com, keescook@chromium.org References: <20220425171526.44925-1-martin.fernandez@eclypsium.com> <20220425171526.44925-6-martin.fernandez@eclypsium.com> From: Dave Hansen In-Reply-To: <20220425171526.44925-6-martin.fernandez@eclypsium.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org On 4/25/22 10:15, Martin Fernandez wrote: > +/** > + * e820__range_remove() - Remove an address range from e820_table. > + * @start: Start of the address range. > + * @size: Size of the address range. > + * @old_type: Type of the entries that we want to remove. > + * @check_type: Bool to decide if ignore @old_type or not. > + * > + * Remove [@start, @start + @size) from e820_table. If @check_type is > + * true remove only entries with type @old_type. > + * > + * Return: The size removed. > + */ The refactoring looks promising. But, there's a *LOT* of kerneldoc noise, like: > + * @table: Target e820_table. > + * @start: Start of the range. > + * @size: Size of the range. and this: > + * struct e820_type_updater_data - Helper type for > + * __e820__range_update(). > + * @old_type: old_type parameter of __e820__range_update(). > + * @new_type: new_type parameter of __e820__range_update(). Those are just a pure waste of bytes. I suspect some more judicious function comments would also make the diffstat look more palatable. Also, in general, the naming is a bit verbose. You might want to trim some of those names down, like: > +static bool __init crypto_updater__should_update(const struct e820_entry *entry, > + const void *data) > +{ > + const struct e820_crypto_updater_data *crypto_updater_data = > + (const struct e820_crypto_updater_data *)data; Those are just some high-level comments. This also needs some really careful review of the refactoring to make sure that it doesn't break any of the existing e820 users.