Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 7/8] x86/setup: simplify handling of initrdidx when no initrd present

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Jan,

On 21/02/2020 16:59, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 01.02.2020 01:33, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > From: David Woodhouse <dwmw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Remove a ternary operator that made my brain hurt.
> Personally I'd prefer the code to stay as is, but if Andrew agrees
> with this being an improvement, then I also wouldn't want to stand
> in the way. If it is to go in I have a few small adjustment requests:
>
> > Replace it with something simpler that makes it somewhat clearer that
> > the check for initrdidx < mbi->mods_count is because mbi->mods_count
> > is what find_first_bit() will return when it doesn't find anything.
> Especially in light of the recent XSA-307 I'd like to ask that we
> avoid imprecise statements like this: Afaict find_first_bit() may
> also validly return any value larger than the passed in bitmap
> length.
Is it? I though that all the callers are now returning 'size' in all the 
error cases.
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel