linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 04/13] vhost: cleanup fetch

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: <7221afa5-bafd-f19b-9cfd-cc51a8d3b321@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 3 Jun 2020 15:29:02 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@...hat.com>,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 04/13] vhost: cleanup fetch_buf return code handling


On 2020/6/2 下午9:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Return code of fetch_buf is confusing, so callers resort to
> tricks to get to sane values. Let's switch to something standard:
> 0 empty, >0 non-empty, <0 error.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin<mst@...hat.com>
> ---
>   drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++--------
>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)


Why not squashing this into patch 2 or 3?

Thanks