在 2018年09月29日 16:30, Borislav Petkov 写道: > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 02:24:52PM +0800, lijiang wrote: >> At first, i added an input parameter for read_from_oldmem() because of >> encryption(SME). But >> for avoiding to also add the same parameter for copy_oldmem_page(), so i >> added a new function >> copy_oldmem_page_encrypted(). Maybe you had noticed that these functions >> were very similar. > > If you have two very similar functions, you add a *static* workhorse function: > > static ssize_t __copy_oldmem_page(unsigned long pfn, char *buf, size_t csize, > unsigned long offset, > int userbuf, bool encrypted) > > and you define two wrappers: > > copy_oldmem_page() > copy_oldmem_page_encrypted() > > which both call __copy_oldmem_page() with the appropriate parameters. >
Great! Previously i was afraid that the maintainer might disagree with rewriting the function copy_oldmem_page(). That's really great. I will modify this patch and post the series again. Thanks. Lianbo > But you do *not* do a separate compilation unit just because. None of > the reasons you've mentioned warrant having a separate compilation > unit while you already have *the* perfect place to put everything - > arch/x86/kernel/crash_dump_64.c > >> So sorry, here "oldmem encrypted" means the "old memory is encrypted". > > I know what it means - I'm trying to explain to you to write it out > in plain english and not use some strange constructs like "oldmem > encrypted". > > A reader would wonder: why is this thing semi-abbreviated and in > quotation marks? Does that mean anything special? > > Our comments should not be write-only. So after you've written it, try > to read it as someone who sees the code for the first time and think > hard whether she/he will understand it. > > Do you catch my drift now? > Yes, got it. Thanks for your valuable time and patience. Regards, Lianbo
