On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 04:10:53PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > From: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > It should be 31 MB on recent host versions. > > Signed-off-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> This is very vague. What does "recent" mean in this context? There are also some unrelated white space changes here which make the patch harder to read. This patch kind of makes the bug fixed by patch 2 even worse because before the receive buffer was capped at around 16MB and now we can set the receive buffer to 31MB. It might make sense to fold the two patches together. Is patch 2 a memory corruption bug? The changelog doesn't really say what the user visible effects of the bug are. Basically if you make the buffer too small then it's a performance issue but if you make it too large what happens? It's not clear to me. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
