linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ieee1394: remove usage of skb

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <45FE28B6.7040200@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date:	Mon, 19 Mar 2007 07:07:50 +0100
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	Kristian Høgsberg <krh@...planet.net>
CC:	linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ieee1394: remove usage of skb_queue as packet queue

Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> But the question is, is it worth it?  One of the primary reasons for
> me to write an alternative stack was to be able to leave linux1394
> in maintenence mode.

I have been asking this myself on nearly every one of my patches since
you announced the new stack. :-)

The skb change here, which I wanted to do for some time, was prompted by
/a/ trouble with skb lock annotations when lockdep went mainline and /b/
a very recent bug report http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8216
which first read like -ENOBUG but then motivated me to clean up
hpsb_packet a bit and also pointed me to a raw1394 bug.  (Besides, most
of the cleanup patches which I came up with were meant to pave the way
for actual bug fixes.  I'm just extremely slow with following up with
the latter.)
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== --== =--==
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/