netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2 v5] usbnet: allow status interrupt URB to always be active

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: <CACVXFVO+QZ+mtdOFuNuh+8HQOMcuQrKJRAaW9ohyrMCMeZXsjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:30:19 +0800
From:	Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
To:	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
Cc:	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>, Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>,
	Elina Pasheva <epasheva@...rrawireless.com>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-usb <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rory Filer <rfiler@...rrawireless.com>,
	Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v5] usbnet: allow status interrupt URB to always be active

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no> wrote:
> Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no> wrote:
>>> Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com> writes:
>>>
>>> Again: What problem are you attempting to solve by removing the
>>> mem_flags from the API?
>>
>> It is not about removing anything, we are discussing one new API
>> (include the parameters) to be introduced.
>
> Yes.  Sure.  And the original proposal was to add a new API with a
> mem_flags parameter.  You proposed to add the same API, but without the
> mem_flags parameter.  You did not explain why.  I still assumed that you
> have some reason to propose it.  I assumed that reason must be some
> problem which would be introduced by having the mem_flags parameter, and
> which would be solved if we instead drop it.
>
> It seems that you are either unable or unwilling to explain your
> reasons, so I'll just go ahead and drop my assumptions.  You never had
> any reason and there never would be any problem.

OK, I say it again, GFP_KERNEL is enough to cover all cases, and the
mem_flags parameter is redundant.


Thanks,
-- 
Ming Lei
--
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