linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel][PATCH 1/3] xen: Introduce shared buffer helpers for page directory...

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 30 Nov 2018 07:50:11 +0100
From:   Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
To:     Oleksandr Andrushchenko <andr2000@...il.com>,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
        boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com
Cc:     Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@...m.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel][PATCH 1/3] xen: Introduce shared buffer helpers for
 page directory...

On 29/11/2018 12:22, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
> ping
> 
> On 11/22/18 12:02 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>> From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@...m.com>
>>
>> based frontends. Currently the frontends which implement
>> similar code for sharing big buffers between frontend and
>> backend are para-virtualized DRM and sound drivers.
>> Both define the same way to share grant references of a
>> data buffer with the corresponding backend with little
>> differences.
>>
>> Move shared code into a helper module, so there is a single
>> implementation of the same functionality for all.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@...m.com>

In general I'm fine with this approach.

With the concerns raised for one of the other patches I wanted to wait
for V2 of the series. Or won't the resulting change require a
modification of this patch?

It would be nice if you could point out in the commit message whether
you are doing code movement (with some renames) only, or if there are
any functional changes involved (and which ones). This would make the
review much easier and less time consuming.


Juergen