linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: Drop unused kvm_dirty_gfn

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: <87r1e7lycp.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 02 Sep 2021 18:46:14 +0200
From:   Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Drop unused kvm_dirty_gfn_harvested()

Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> writes:

> On Thu, Sep 02, 2021, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com> writes:
>> 
>> > Drop the unused function as reported by test bot.
>> 
>> Your subject line says "Drop unused kvm_dirty_gfn_harvested()" while in
>> reallity you drop "kvm_dirty_gfn_invalid()".
>
> Heh, Peter already sent v2[*].  Though that's a good reminder that it's helpful
> to reviewers to respond to your own patch if there's a fatal mistake and you're
> going to immediately post a new version.  For tiny patches it's not a big deal,
> but for larger patches it can avoid wasting reviewers' time.
>

Indeed. It's also a good reminder for reviewers that inbox is best
treated like a stack and not like a queue :-)

-- 
Vitaly