netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/4] [CORE]: adding memory accounting points

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:	Sun, 30 Dec 2007 23:58:06 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	haoki@...hat.com
Cc:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, vladislav.yasevich@...com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, lksctp-developers@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	tyasui@...hat.com, mhiramat@...hat.com,
	satoshi.oshima.fk@...achi.com, billfink@...dspring.com,
	andi@...stfloor.org, johnpol@....mipt.ru,
	shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
	yumiko.sugita.yf@...achi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] [CORE]: adding memory accounting points

From: Hideo AOKI <haoki@...hat.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 03:51:44 -0500

> To consolidate memory accounting functions, this patch adds memory
> accounting calls to network core functions. Moreover, present
> memory accounting call is renamed to new accounting call.
> 
> Cc: Satoshi Oshima <satoshi.oshima.fk@...achi.com>
> Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
> signed-off-by: Takahiro Yasui <tyasui@...hat.com>
> signed-off-by: Hideo Aoki <haoki@...hat.com>

This patch would not apply, because is contained changes
present in the first patch, specifically:

> diff -pruN net-2.6.25-t12t19m-p1/include/net/sock.h net-2.6.25-t12t19m-p2/include/net/sock.h
> --- net-2.6.25-t12t19m-p1/include/net/sock.h	2007-12-29 20:16:31.000000000 -0500
> +++ net-2.6.25-t12t19m-p2/include/net/sock.h	2007-12-29 20:28:15.000000000 -0500
> @@ -1116,7 +1116,7 @@ static inline int skb_copy_to_page(struc
>  	skb->data_len	     += copy;
>  	skb->truesize	     += copy;
>  	sk->sk_wmem_queued   += copy;
> -	sk->sk_forward_alloc -= copy;
> +	sk_mem_charge(sk, copy);
>  	return 0;
>  }
> 
> @@ -1142,6 +1142,7 @@ static inline void skb_set_owner_r(struc
>  	skb->sk = sk;
>  	skb->destructor = sock_rfree;
>  	atomic_add(skb->truesize, &sk->sk_rmem_alloc);
> +	sk_mem_charge(sk, skb->truesize);
>  }
> 
>  extern void sk_reset_timer(struct sock *sk, struct timer_list* timer,

And now I see exactly what you did, and it is quite careless.

You wrote one big patch then tried to split it up by hand.  This
proves to me that you did not test the patches individually.  Even
worse, you did not even try to apply each patch nor compile the tree
each step along the way as a basic sanity check.

This wastes a lot of my time, as well as the time of other developers
who might want to try out and test your changes.

I will fix it up this time, but please do not ever do this again.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html