[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230201210107.450ff5d3@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 21:01:07 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Michael Kelley <mikelley@...rosoft.com>
Cc: kys@...rosoft.com, haiyangz@...rosoft.com, wei.liu@...nel.org,
decui@...rosoft.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/1] hv_netvsc: Fix missed pagebuf entries in
netvsc_dma_map/unmap()
On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:33:06 -0800 Michael Kelley wrote:
> @@ -990,9 +987,7 @@ static int netvsc_dma_map(struct hv_device *hv_dev,
> struct hv_netvsc_packet *packet,
> struct hv_page_buffer *pb)
> {
> - u32 page_count = packet->cp_partial ?
> - packet->page_buf_cnt - packet->rmsg_pgcnt :
> - packet->page_buf_cnt;
> + u32 page_count = packet->page_buf_cnt;
> dma_addr_t dma;
> int i;
Suspiciously, the caller still does:
if (packet->cp_partial)
pb += packet->rmsg_pgcnt;
ret = netvsc_dma_map(ndev_ctx->device_ctx, packet, pb);
Shouldn't that if () pb +=... also go away?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists