Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <YfwZ6ne9ND1JaReS@kernel.org>
References: <20220203164328.203629-1-martin.fernandez@eclypsium.com>
 <20220203164328.203629-2-martin.fernandez@eclypsium.com> <YfwZ6ne9ND1JaReS@kernel.org>
From:   Martin Fernandez <martin.fernandez@eclypsium.com>
Date:   Thu, 3 Feb 2022 15:24:29 -0300
Message-ID: <CAKgze5ZVHax5AWP3Q764dSmjAJWncyZbn4ENQCkYs0ahbG9Haw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/6] mm/memblock: Tag memblocks with crypto capabilities
To:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
        platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        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,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, daniel.gutson@eclypsium.com,
        hughsient@gmail.com, alex.bazhaniuk@eclypsium.com,
        alison.schofield@intel.com, keescook@chromium.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On 2/3/22, Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> 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.