linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/13] virtio/vsock: introduce SOCK

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]

Date:   Fri, 15 Jan 2021 12:59:30 +0300
From:   stsp <stsp2@...dex.ru>
To:     Arseny Krasnov <arseny.krasnov@...persky.com>,
        Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
        Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
        Andra Paraschiv <andraprs@...zon.com>,
        Jeff Vander Stoep <jeffv@...gle.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        oxffffaa@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/13] virtio/vsock: introduce SOCK_SEQPACKET
 support.

15.01.2021 08:35, Arseny Krasnov пишет:
> 	This patchset impelements support of SOCK_SEQPACKET for virtio
> transport.
> 	As SOCK_SEQPACKET guarantees to save record boundaries, so to
> do it, new packet operation was added: it marks start of record (with
> record length in header), such packet doesn't carry any data.  To send
> record, packet with start marker is sent first, then all data is sent
> as usual 'RW' packets. On receiver's side, length of record is known
> from packet with start record marker. Now as  packets of one socket
> are not reordered neither on vsock nor on vhost transport layers, such
> marker allows to restore original record on receiver's side. If user's
> buffer is smaller that

than

>   record length, when

then

>   v1 -> v2:
>   - patches reordered: af_vsock.c changes now before virtio vsock
>   - patches reorganized: more small patches, where +/- are not mixed

If you did this because I asked, then this
is not what I asked. :)
You can't just add some static func in a
separate patch, as it will just produce the
compilation warning of an unused function.
I only asked to separate the refactoring from
the new code. I.e. if you move some code
block to a separate function, you shouldn't
split that into 2 patches, one that adds a
code block and another one that removes it.
It should be in one patch, so that it is clear
what was moved, and no new warnings are
introduced.
What I asked to separate, is the old code
moves with the new code additions. Such
things can definitely go in a separate patches.

NB: just trying to help, as I already played
with your code a bit. I am neither a
maintainer nor a contributor here, but
it would be cool to have the vsock SEQPACKET
support.