netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] VSOCK: Introduce VM Sockets

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: <511CC511.7080902@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:05:53 +0100
From:	Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
To:	Andy King <acking@...are.com>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	pv-drivers@...are.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] VSOCK: Introduce VM Sockets

On 02/07/13 01:23, Andy King wrote:
> +		written = transport->stream_enqueue(
> +				vsk, msg->msg_iov,
> +				len - total_written);

Hmm, shouldn't we pass total_written to stream_enqueue here?

In case a blocking send(big-buffer) call gets splitted into multiple
stream_enqueue calls the second (and further) stream_enqueue calls need
to know at which msg offset they should continue sending the data, no?

cheers,
  Gerd
--
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