[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <MWHPR21MB0190F3BDCF6E753002A3BF21CE5F0@MWHPR21MB0190.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 18:39:00 +0000
From: Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>
To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
CC: KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Meyer <Paul.Meyer@...rosoft.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] hv: kvp: Avoid reading past allocated blocks from KVP
file
> From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@...ah.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 11:50 PM
> To: Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>
> Cc: KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>; Haiyang Zhang
> <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>; Stephen Hemminger
> <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>; devel@...uxdriverproject.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; stable@...r.kernel.org; Paul Meyer
> <Paul.Meyer@...rosoft.com>; Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] hv: kvp: Avoid reading past allocated blocks from
> KVP file
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 01:02:35PM -0700, Long Li wrote:
> > From: Paul Meyer <Paul.Meyer@...rosoft.com>
> >
> > While reading in more than one block (50) of KVP records, the
> > allocation goes per block, but the reads used the total number of
> > allocated records (without resetting the pointer/stream). This causes
> > the records buffer to overrun when the refresh reads more than one
> > block over the previous capacity (e.g. reading more than 100 KVP
> > records whereas the in-memory database was empty before).
> >
> > Fix this by reading the correct number of KVP records from file each time.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paul Meyer <Paul.Meyer@...rosoft.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>
> > ---
> > tools/hv/hv_kvp_daemon.c | 66
> > ++++++++----------------------------------------
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
>
> When you version a patch, you always have to say what changed below the
> --- line, as the documentation states to do...
Sorry it was my bad. Can I resend v2 and indicate what has changed?
Long
>
> v3? :)
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists