netdev - Re: [PATCH V4 8/8] net/mlx4_en: Set max rate-limit for a TC

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: <CAJZOPZ+G_FSdbnBZAGFLwu+K98xBnH5BOos7DJ8Xek5dAYG+sQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 1 Apr 2012 10:04:05 +0300
From:	Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	amirv@...lanox.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	roland@...estorage.com, yevgenyp@...lanox.com, oren@...lanox.com,
	amirv@....mellanox.co.il
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 8/8] net/mlx4_en: Set max rate-limit for a TC

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 12:25 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> From: Amir Vadai <amirv@...lanox.com>
> Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 20:27:20 +0200
>
> > I was in a rush to send it on time and missed it (of course I tested
> > only tc 0 so didn't see it in my tests too).
>
> Being in a rush when you expect others to spend time reviewing your
> code is an extremely selfish act.

Hi Dave,

Yep, a mistake was done here, but as they say "only he who never does
never errs..."
so Amir will surely learn from that, and so am I - here wearing the
internal reviewer hat,
didn't review V4 deep enough. We spotted also some vzalloc calls in
the patches which
are under the HW QoS model debate and will fix there as well. V5 will
be also against
net-next but depending on your decision maybe it can still go to 3.4?

Or.
--
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