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  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, 8 May 2020 14:24:34 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Luo bin <luobin9@...wei.com>
Cc:     <davem@...emloft.net>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <luoxianjun@...wei.com>,
        <yin.yinshi@...wei.com>, <cloud.wangxiaoyun@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v1] hinic: fix a bug of ndo_stop

On Thu, 7 May 2020 18:22:27 +0000 Luo bin wrote:
> if some function in ndo_stop interface returns failure because of
> hardware fault, must go on excuting rest steps rather than return
> failure directly, otherwise will cause memory leak
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luo bin <luobin9@...wei.com>

The code looks good, but would it make sense to split this patch into
two? First one that ignores the return values on close path with these
fixes tags:

Fixes: e2585ea77538 ("net-next/hinic: Add Rx handler")
Fixes: c4d06d2d208a ("net-next/hinic: Add Rx mode and link event handler")

And a separate patch which bumps the timeout for SET_FUNC_STATE? Right
now you don't even mention the timeout changes in the commit message.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists