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, 10 Mar 2023 12:40:00 +0100
From:   Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
To:     Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@...rdevices.ru>
Cc:     Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>,
        Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...rdevices.ru,
        oxffffaa@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/4] several updates to virtio/vsock

On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 12:42:13PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>
>
>On 10.03.2023 12:09, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>> Hi Arseniy,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 11:24:42PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> this patchset evolved from previous v2 version (see link below). It does
>>> several updates to virtio/vsock:
>>> 1) Changes 'virtio_transport_inc/dec_rx_pkt()' interface. Now instead of
>>>   using skbuff state ('head' and 'data' pointers) to update 'fwd_cnt'
>>>   and 'rx_bytes', integer value is passed as an input argument. This
>>>   makes code more simple, because in this case we don't need to update
>>>   skbuff state before calling 'virtio_transport_inc/dec_rx_pkt()'. In
>>>   more common words - we don't need to change skbuff state to update
>>>   'rx_bytes' and 'fwd_cnt' correctly.
>>> 2) For SOCK_STREAM, when copying data to user fails, current skbuff is
>>>   not dropped. Next read attempt will use same skbuff and last offset.
>>>   Instead of 'skb_dequeue()', 'skb_peek()' + '__skb_unlink()' are used.
>>>   This behaviour was implemented before skbuff support.
>>> 3) For SOCK_SEQPACKET it removes unneeded 'skb_pull()' call, because for
>>>   this type of socket each skbuff is used only once: after removing it
>>>   from socket's queue, it will be freed anyway.
>>
>> thanks for the fixes, I would wait a few days to see if there are any
>> comments and then I think you can send it on net without RFC.
>>
>> @Bobby if you can take a look, your ack would be appreciated :-)
>Ok, thanks for review. I'll wait for several days and also wait until
>net-next will be opened. Then i'll resend this patchset with net-next

Since they are fixes, they should go with the net tree, not net-next.

Cheers,
Stefano

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ