[v2,00/10] Improvements for random.h/archrandom.h

Message

Richard Henderson Nov. 6, 2019, 2:12 p.m. UTC

During patch review for an addition of archrandom.h for arm64, it was
suggeted that the arch_random_get_* functions should be marked __must_check.
Which does sound like a good idea, since the by-reference integer output
may be uninitialized when the boolean result is false.

In addition, it turns out that arch_has_random() and arch_has_random_seed()
are not used, and not easy to support for arm64.  Rather than cobble
something together that would not be testable, remove the interfaces
against some future accidental use.

In addition, I noticed a few other minor inconsistencies between the
different architectures, e.g. powerpc isn't using bool.

Change since v1:
  * Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed.


r~


Richard Henderson (10):
  x86: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
  powerpc: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
  s390: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
  linux/random.h: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
  linux/random.h: Use false with bool
  linux/random.h: Mark CONFIG_ARCH_RANDOM functions __must_check
  x86: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check
  powerpc: Use bool in archrandom.h
  powerpc: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check
  s390x: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check

 arch/powerpc/include/asm/archrandom.h | 27 +++++++++-----------------
 arch/s390/include/asm/archrandom.h    | 20 ++++---------------
 arch/x86/include/asm/archrandom.h     | 28 ++++++++++++---------------
 include/linux/random.h                | 24 ++++++++---------------
 4 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)

Comments

Borislav Petkov Nov. 11, 2019, 5:20 p.m. UTC | #1

On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 03:12:58PM +0100, Richard Henderson wrote:
> During patch review for an addition of archrandom.h for arm64, it was
> suggeted that the arch_random_get_* functions should be marked __must_check.
> Which does sound like a good idea, since the by-reference integer output
> may be uninitialized when the boolean result is false.
> 
> In addition, it turns out that arch_has_random() and arch_has_random_seed()
> are not used, and not easy to support for arm64.  Rather than cobble
> something together that would not be testable, remove the interfaces
> against some future accidental use.
> 
> In addition, I noticed a few other minor inconsistencies between the
> different architectures, e.g. powerpc isn't using bool.
> 
> Change since v1:
>   * Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed.
> 
> 
> r~
> 
> 
> Richard Henderson (10):
>   x86: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
>   powerpc: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
>   s390: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
>   linux/random.h: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
>   linux/random.h: Use false with bool
>   linux/random.h: Mark CONFIG_ARCH_RANDOM functions __must_check
>   x86: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check
>   powerpc: Use bool in archrandom.h
>   powerpc: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check
>   s390x: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check
> 
>  arch/powerpc/include/asm/archrandom.h | 27 +++++++++-----------------
>  arch/s390/include/asm/archrandom.h    | 20 ++++---------------
>  arch/x86/include/asm/archrandom.h     | 28 ++++++++++++---------------
>  include/linux/random.h                | 24 ++++++++---------------
>  4 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 

They look good to me.

Is anyone going to take them or should I though the tip tree?

Thx.