netdev - Re: [PATCH net v2] xen-netback: bookkeep number of active 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]

Date:	Sun, 22 Jun 2014 17:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	wei.liu2@...rix.com
Cc:	xen-devel@...ts.xen.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, ian.campbell@...rix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] xen-netback: bookkeep number of active queues
 in our own module

From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 14:31:41 +0100

>  
> +	/* Initialisation completed, tell core driver the number of
> +	 * active queues.
> +	 */
> +	rtnl_lock();
> +	netif_set_real_num_tx_queues(be->vif->dev, requested_num_queues);
> +	netif_set_real_num_rx_queues(be->vif->dev, requested_num_queues);
> +	rtnl_unlock();
> +
>  	xenvif_carrier_on(be->vif);

This function _NEVER_ set the number of RX queues beforehand,
therefore why are you adding an RX queue adjustment now?

Regardless of the reason, you must explain such a change, in
detail, in your commit message.

Your previous patch didn't do this, and I really am suspect as to
whether you functionally tested and verified this aspect of your
change at a ll.

Please don't "quietly" make undescribed changes like this. It's very
tiring to think that a patch has been adjusted to my liking and then
during review I find a grenade like this :-/

Thanks.
--
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