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: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 08:41:41 +0100 From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com> To: "annie li" <annie.li@...cle.com> Cc: <david.vrabel@...rix.com>, <ian.campbell@...rix.com>, <wei.liu2@...rix.com>, <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>, "Jason Luan" <jianhai.luan@...cle.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net] xen-netback: add the scenario which now beyond the range time_after_eq(). >>> On 17.10.13 at 18:21, annie li <annie.li@...cle.com> wrote: > On 2013-10-17 16:26, Jan Beulich wrote: >> So first of all this must be with a 32-bit netback. And the not >> coverable gap between activity is well over 240 days long. _If_ >> this really needs dealing with, then why is extending this from >> 240+ to 480+ days sufficient? > > I am not so sure your mean about extending from 240+ to 480+. Do you > mean "now" wrapped case happens and falls into the range of from expires > to next_credit? If this happens, the timer would be set with value based > on next_credit, which is actually implements the rate control. My point was simply that doubling the span the code can cover is pointless - either 240 days is long enough, of 480 days isn't either. Jan -- 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