linux-kernel - Re: KVM: Fine-tuning for several function implementations

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

Message-ID: <a1a42521-ca5c-8bff-0121-d4b63fd570f3@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:   Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:48:15 +0100
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: KVM: Fine-tuning for several function implementations

> Patches 1, 6 and 7 are acceptable.

Thanks for a bit of positive feedback.


> The others are useless churn or they make the result uselessly different
> from the rest of KVM code.

I got an other view about potential benefits around the suggested movements
for error code settings.
Would others like to help in approaches for checking corresponding run time changes
a bit more?

Regards,
Markus