netdev - Re: [PATCH net 1/1] driver: macvlan: Destroy new macvlan port if macvlan_common

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: <CA+6hz4ofB2HX1zuhMuhC_kE62b_iy6USC8aZ5Yzp--MrLrUAMw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Nov 2016 11:22:58 +0800
From:   Gao Feng <fgao@...ai8.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/1] driver: macvlan: Destroy new macvlan port if
 macvlan_common_newlink failed.

Hi David,

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 9:33 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: fgao@...ai8.com
> Date: Fri,  4 Nov 2016 10:28:49 +0800
>
>> From: Gao Feng <fgao@...ai8.com>
>>
>> When there is no existing macvlan port in lowdev, one new macvlan port
>> would be created. But it doesn't be destoried when something failed later.
>> It casues some memleak.
>>
>> Now add one flag to indicate if new macvlan port is created.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gao Feng <fgao@...ai8.com>
>
> You need to be more patient, it sometimes take several days before
> your get patch reviewed or applied.  Sometimes nobody reviews a change
> for some time because it is obscure or everyone is busy.

Sorry, it is my fault.
I thought this patch may be lost because there are too many emails every day.
So ping just as a reminder.

>
> All patches are tracked in patchwork, so it is never an issue of a
> change getting "lost".  Therefore, it never makes sense to ping the
> list again and ask if a change is "ok".
>
> Personally, when people ping like that, it makes me want to review
> that patch _less_ not more.  So please do not do it.
>
> Thank you.
>

Now I get it. I violated some rules as a fresh man in kernel community.
Sorry again.


Best Regards
Feng