linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] hv_netvsc: Split netvsc_revoke_buf() and netvsc_teardown

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: <1517397409.3452.7.camel@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 31 Jan 2018 12:16:49 +0100
From:   Mohammed Gamal <mgamal@...hat.com>
To:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, otubo@...hat.com, sthemmin@...rosoft.com,
        haiyangz@...rosoft.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devel@...uxdriverproject.org, vkuznets@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] hv_netvsc: Split netvsc_revoke_buf() and
 netvsc_teardown_gpadl()

On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 11:29 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 10:34:04 +0100
> Mohammed Gamal <mgamal@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Split each of the functions into two for each of send/recv buffers
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mohammed Gamal <mgamal@...hat.com>
> 
> Splitting these functions is not necessary

How so? We need to send each message independently, and hence the split
(see cover letter). Is there another way?