linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] staging: lustre: separate a connection destroy from free struct kib

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: <20180124142954.GA4658@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Jan 2018 15:29:54 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Dmitry Eremin <dmitry.eremin@...el.com>
Cc:     devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
        Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
        James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] staging: lustre: separate a connection destroy from
 free struct kib_conn

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 05:14:12PM +0300, Dmitry Eremin wrote:
> Rewrite the logic of the original commit 4d99b2581eff ("staging: lustre: avoid
> intensive reconnecting for ko2iblnd") and move the freeing a struct kib_conn
> outside of the function kiblnd_destroy_conn(). The freeing of struct kib_conn
> should be depending on the second argument free_conn of function
> kiblnd_destroy_conn(struct kib_conn *conn, bool free_conn). If it true the
> structure should be freed.
> 
> Fixes: 4d99b2581eff ("staging: lustre: avoid intensive reconnecting for ko2iblnd")
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin <Dmitry.Eremin@...el.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c    | 7 +++----
>  drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.h    | 2 +-
>  drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd_cb.c | 6 ++++--
>  3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

What changed from version 2 and 1?  Always included that below the ---
line please.

4th try is a charm?  :)

thanks,

greg k-h