netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] vhost-net: revert vhost_exceeds

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1503322340.8694.9.camel@klaipeden.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Aug 2017 22:32:20 +0900
From:   Koichiro Den <den@...ipeden.com>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, mst@...hat.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] vhost-net: revert vhost_exceeds_maxpend logic to
 its original

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 20:40 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2017年08月21日 11:06, Jason Wang wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 2017年08月19日 14:41, Koichiro Den wrote:
> > > To depend on vq.num and the usage of VHOST_MAX_PEND is not succinct
> > > and in some case unexpected, so revert its logic part only.
> > 
> > Hi:
> > 
> > Could you explain a little bit more on the case that is was not 
> > sufficent?
> > 
> > Thanks
> 
> Just have another thought.
> 
> I wonder whether or not just use ulimit(memlock) is better here. It 
> looks more flexible.
> 
> Thanks
It sounds a better approach, though at present I have got no idea how much
portion it should be.