On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 06:39:00PM +0000, Long Li wrote: > > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@xxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 11:50 PM > > To: Long Li <longli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: KY Srinivasan <kys@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Haiyang Zhang > > <haiyangz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Stephen Hemminger > > <sthemmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Paul Meyer > > <Paul.Meyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Long Li <longli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] hv: kvp: Avoid reading past allocated blocks from > > KVP file > > > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 01:02:35PM -0700, Long Li wrote: > > > From: Paul Meyer <Paul.Meyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > While reading in more than one block (50) of KVP records, the > > > allocation goes per block, but the reads used the total number of > > > allocated records (without resetting the pointer/stream). This causes > > > the records buffer to overrun when the refresh reads more than one > > > block over the previous capacity (e.g. reading more than 100 KVP > > > records whereas the in-memory database was empty before). > > > > > > Fix this by reading the correct number of KVP records from file each time. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul Meyer <Paul.Meyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Long Li <longli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > tools/hv/hv_kvp_daemon.c | 66 > > > ++++++++---------------------------------------- > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-) > > > > When you version a patch, you always have to say what changed below the > > --- line, as the documentation states to do... > > Sorry it was my bad. Can I resend v2 and indicate what has changed? Why wouldn't you? But it would be v3 then :) greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
