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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 2 Sep 2021 15:53:51 -0400
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
Cc:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.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()

On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 06:46:14PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> 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 :-)

It should really be a queue, to be fair. :)

I normally glance all the emails before looking into the details.  But that's
not an excuse for sure, I should have NACKed that one.  Sorry about that.

-- 
Peter Xu