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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:45:38 +0100 From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com> To: Andy King <acking@...are.com> CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, davem@...emloft.net, pv-drivers@...are.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] VSOCK: Introduce VM Sockets On 02/18/13 18:07, Andy King wrote: > Hi Gerd, > >>> + written = transport->stream_enqueue( >>> + vsk, msg->msg_iov, >>> + len - total_written); >> >> Hmm, shouldn't we pass total_written to stream_enqueue here? >> >> In case a blocking send(big-buffer) call gets splitted into multiple >> stream_enqueue calls the second (and further) stream_enqueue calls need >> to know at which msg offset they should continue sending the data, no? > > On the client side, the iov tracks it internally; see memcpy_fromiovec(). Ah, memcpy_fromiovec patches the iovec to keep track of the offset. Wasn't aware it does this. Yes, we don't need to pass the offset then. cheers, Gerd -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists