netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC 2/5] vringfd base/offset

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 05 Apr 2008 12:18:59 -0500
From:	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/5] vringfd base/offset

Rusty Russell wrote:
> It turns out the lguest (and possibly kvm) want the addresses in the
> ring buffer to only cover a certain part of memory, and be offset.
> 
> It makes sense that this be an ioctl.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
>

<snip>

> @@ -208,12 +232,15 @@ int vring_get_buffer(struct vring_info *
>  		out_len = &dummy;
>  
>  	*in_len = *out_len = 0;
> -	
> -	if (unlikely(get_user(head, &vr->ring.avail->ring[head]) != 0))
> +
> +	if (unlikely(get_user(head, &vr->ring.avail->ring[vr->last_avail
> +							  % vr->ring.num])))

Why not & with vr->mask for the sake of consistency with the rest of the 
code.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html