netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next 2/5] qed: Fix TM block ILT allocation

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: <BL2PR07MB23065BDE84DBA9DC5D2B8FBD8D080@BL2PR07MB2306.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Mon, 3 Apr 2017 13:58:19 +0000
From:   "Mintz, Yuval" <Yuval.Mintz@...ium.com>
To:     Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "Kalderon, Michal" <Michal.Kalderon@...ium.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 2/5] qed: Fix TM block ILT allocation

> > +	/* Timers is a special case -> we don't count how many cids require
> 
>     S/is/are/. CIDs?

What's implicitly meant here is the 'Timer[s] HW block'.
I understand it creates an odd looking English sentence, though.

Assuming there'll be a V2 for this we'd revise the comment;
Otherwise we'd do it in some future cleanup patch.