| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20140115.164649.533508366980529205.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:46:49 -0800 (PST) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: rusty@...tcorp.com.au Cc: jasowang@...hat.com, mst@...hat.com, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC] virtio-net: drop rq->max and rq->num From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 10:25:26 +1030 > Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> writes: >> Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> writes: >>> It looks like there's no need for those two fields: >>> >>> - Unless there's a failure for the first refill try, rq->max should be always >>> equal to the vring size. >>> - rq->num is only used to determine the condition that we need to do the refill, >>> we could check vq->num_free instead. >>> - rq->num was required to be increased or decreased explicitly after each >>> get/put which results a bad API. >>> >>> So this patch removes them both to make the code simpler. >> >> Nice. These fields date from when the vq struct was opaque. >> >> Applied, >> Rusty. > > Oops, this doesn't require any core virtio changes, so it's for DaveM: > > Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> Jason please repost this with Rusty's ACK, thanks. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists