netdev - Re: [PATCH net] xen-netback: bookkeep number of queues in our own module

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: <20140623.022532.105159906302303437.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 23 Jun 2014 02:25:32 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	Paul.Durrant@...rix.com
Cc:	wei.liu2@...rix.com, xen-devel@...ts.xen.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com,
	Ian.Campbell@...rix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] xen-netback: bookkeep number of queues in our own
 module

From: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@...rix.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 09:18:23 +0000

> Ok, for the addition of a new algorithm that may be the case but
> what about the existent algorithm stability issue? Who's going to
> watch the implementation of __netdev_pick_tx() and make sure there
> is no semantic change? I'm still of the opinion that the
> implementation should be kept within netback so that we can
> guarantee stability, even if it means duplication. Either that or we
> need some guarantee that the semantic of __netdev_pick_tx() will
> never change.

Please stop talking like this.

If the default changes it's probably to fix a bug or make things
better, you want no bugs to get fix if it breaks "stability"?
--
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