netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] r8152: adjust rtl_start

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 13 Nov 2014 16:22:40 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	hayeswang@...ltek.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, nic_swsd@...ltek.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] r8152: adjust rtl_start_rx

From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 22:31:46 -0500 (EST)

> From: Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com>
> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 02:31:14 +0000
> 
>> My last method which I mentioned yesterday is similar to
>> this one. The difference is that I would re-use the rx
>> buffers, so I have to add them to the list for re-submitting,
>> not alwayes allocate new one.
>> 
>> Although one rx buffer could contain many packets, I don't
>> think the whole size of the rx buffer is alwayes used.
>> Therefore, I re-use the rx buffers to avoid allocating
>> the 16K bytes rx buffer alwayes. This also makes sure that
>> I always have the buffers to submit without allocating new
>> one.
>> 
>> If you could accept this, I would modify this patch by
>> this way.
> 
> I'll reread your original patch and think some more about this.

What if even the first r8152_submit_rx() fails?  What ever will cause
any of these retries to trigger at all?

Second, why does your patch increment 'i' with 'i++;' in the error
break path?  You should mark the first failed entry as unallocated
with actual_length == 0 and place it on the rx_done queue.
--
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