search for: 4e9fa50c6ccbe

...tworking. Fixing this by safely removing VHOST_NET_F_VIRTIO_NET_HDR support. There should be very few or even no userspace can use this. Further cleanups could be done for -net-next for safety. In the future, we need a vhost dedicated feature set/get ioctl() instead of reusing virtio ones. Fixes: 4e9fa50c6ccbe ("vhost: move features to core") Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> --- drivers/vhost/net.c | 15 +++++---------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c index 986058a..83eef52 100644 --- a/drivers/vho...

...tworking. Fixing this by safely removing VHOST_NET_F_VIRTIO_NET_HDR support. There should be very few or even no userspace can use this. Further cleanups could be done for -net-next for safety. In the future, we need a vhost dedicated feature set/get ioctl() instead of reusing virtio ones. Fixes: 4e9fa50c6ccbe ("vhost: move features to core") Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> --- drivers/vhost/net.c | 15 +++++---------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c index 986058a..83eef52 100644 --- a/drivers/vho...

...a vhost dedicated feature set/get ioctl() >> instead of reusing virtio ones. > Not just in the future, we might want to switch iommu > to a sane structure without the 64 bit padding bug > right now. Yes, I hit this bug when introducing V2 of msg IOTLB message. > >> Fixes: 4e9fa50c6ccbe ("vhost: move features to core") > This tag makes no sense here IMHO. Looks like people are using some tool > that just looks at the earliest version where patch won't apply. The > commit in question just moved some code around. Looks not, before this commit, vhost_net won...

...a vhost dedicated feature set/get ioctl() >> instead of reusing virtio ones. > Not just in the future, we might want to switch iommu > to a sane structure without the 64 bit padding bug > right now. Yes, I hit this bug when introducing V2 of msg IOTLB message. > >> Fixes: 4e9fa50c6ccbe ("vhost: move features to core") > This tag makes no sense here IMHO. Looks like people are using some tool > that just looks at the earliest version where patch won't apply. The > commit in question just moved some code around. Looks not, before this commit, vhost_net won...

...bug >>> right now. >> Yes, I hit this bug when introducing V2 of msg IOTLB message. > Sounds good, so if you like, reserve a bit for > VHOST_NET_F_VIRTIO_NET_HDR in the new ioctl mask and > do not enable it there. Ok, and maybe VHOST_F_LOG_ALL. > >>>> Fixes: 4e9fa50c6ccbe ("vhost: move features to core") >>> This tag makes no sense here IMHO. Looks like people are using some tool >>> that just looks at the earliest version where patch won't apply. The >>> commit in question just moved some code around. >> Looks not, bef...

...anups could be done for > -net-next for safety. > > In the future, we need a vhost dedicated feature set/get ioctl() > instead of reusing virtio ones. Not just in the future, we might want to switch iommu to a sane structure without the 64 bit padding bug right now. > > Fixes: 4e9fa50c6ccbe ("vhost: move features to core") This tag makes no sense here IMHO. Looks like people are using some tool that just looks at the earliest version where patch won't apply. The commit in question just moved some code around. > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com&gt...

...sane structure without the 64 bit padding bug > > right now. > > Yes, I hit this bug when introducing V2 of msg IOTLB message. Sounds good, so if you like, reserve a bit for VHOST_NET_F_VIRTIO_NET_HDR in the new ioctl mask and do not enable it there. > > > > > Fixes: 4e9fa50c6ccbe ("vhost: move features to core") > > This tag makes no sense here IMHO. Looks like people are using some tool > > that just looks at the earliest version where patch won't apply. The > > commit in question just moved some code around. > > Looks not, before thi...