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:   Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     ap420073@...il.com
Cc:     pshelar@....org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, dev@...nvswitch.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: openvswitch: do not update max_headroom
 if new headroom is equal to old headroom

From: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>
Date: Sat,  6 Jul 2019 01:08:09 +0900

> When a vport is deleted, the maximum headroom size would be changed.
> If the vport which has the largest headroom is deleted,
> the new max_headroom would be set.
> But, if the new headroom size is equal to the old headroom size,
> updating routine is unnecessary.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>

I don't think Taehee should be punished because it took several days
to get someone to look at and review and/or test this patch and
meanwhile the net-next tree closed down.

I ask for maintainer review as both a courtesy and a way to lessen
my workload.  But if that means patches rot for days in patchwork
I'm just going to apply them after my own review.

So I'm applying this now.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ