* [PATCH 1/1] Properly check return values of kmalloc and vmbus_recvpacket
@ 2010-12-09 20:23 Hank Janssen
2010-12-10 0:13 ` Ky Srinivasan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Hank Janssen @ 2010-12-09 20:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: hjanssen, zbr, gregkh, linux-kernel, devel, virtualization; +Cc: Haiyang Zhang
Correct ugly oversight, we need to check the return values of kmalloc
and vmbus_recvpacket and return if they fail. I also tightened up the
call to kmalloc.
Thanks to Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@ioremap.net> for pointing this out.
Signed-off-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Hank Janssen <hjanssen@microsoft.com>
---
drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c b/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
index 53e1e29..ac68575 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
@@ -43,21 +43,27 @@ static void shutdown_onchannelcallback(void *context)
{
struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
u8 *buf;
- u32 buflen, recvlen;
+ u32 recvlen;
u64 requestid;
u8 execute_shutdown = false;
+ int ret = 0;
struct shutdown_msg_data *shutdown_msg;
struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
struct icmsg_negotiate *negop = NULL;
- buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
- buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
+ buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
- vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
+ if (!buf) {
+ printk(KERN_INFO
+ "Unable to allocate memory for shutdown_onchannelcallback");
+ return;
+ }
+
+ ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
- if (recvlen > 0) {
+ if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "shutdown packet: len=%d, requestid=%lld",
recvlen, requestid);
@@ -151,17 +157,23 @@ static void timesync_onchannelcallback(void *context)
{
struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
u8 *buf;
- u32 buflen, recvlen;
+ u32 recvlen;
u64 requestid;
struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
struct ictimesync_data *timedatap;
+ int ret = 0;
- buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
- buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
+ buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
- vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
+ if (!buf) {
+ printk(KERN_INFO
+ "Unable to allocate memory for timesync_onchannelcallback");
+ return;
+ }
- if (recvlen > 0) {
+ ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
+
+ if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "timesync packet: recvlen=%d, requestid=%lld",
recvlen, requestid);
@@ -197,17 +209,23 @@ static void heartbeat_onchannelcallback(void *context)
{
struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
u8 *buf;
- u32 buflen, recvlen;
+ u32 recvlen;
u64 requestid;
struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
struct heartbeat_msg_data *heartbeat_msg;
+ int ret = 0;
+
+ buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
- buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
- buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
+ if (!buf) {
+ printk(KERN_INFO
+ "Unable to allocate memory for heartbeat_onchannelcallback");
+ return;
+ }
- vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
+ ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
- if (recvlen > 0) {
+ if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "heartbeat packet: len=%d, requestid=%lld",
recvlen, requestid);
--
1.6.0.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] Properly check return values of kmalloc and vmbus_recvpacket
2010-12-10 0:13 ` Ky Srinivasan
(?)
@ 2010-12-10 0:10 ` Jesper Juhl
2010-12-10 0:20 ` Hank Janssen
-1 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jesper Juhl @ 2010-12-10 0:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ky Srinivasan
Cc: zbr, devel, virtualization, hjanssen, gregkh, linux-kernel,
Haiyang Zhang
On Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Ky Srinivasan wrote:
>
>
> >>> On 12/9/2010 at 3:23 PM, in message
> <1291926209-17120-1-git-send-email-hjanssen@microsoft.com>, Hank Janssen
> <hjanssen@microsoft.com> wrote:
> > Correct ugly oversight, we need to check the return values of kmalloc
> > and vmbus_recvpacket and return if they fail. I also tightened up the
> > call to kmalloc.
> >
> > Thanks to Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@ioremap.net> for pointing this out.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Hank Janssen <hjanssen@microsoft.com>
> >
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> > 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c b/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
> > index 53e1e29..ac68575 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
> > @@ -43,21 +43,27 @@ static void shutdown_onchannelcallback(void *context)
> > {
> > struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
> > u8 *buf;
> > - u32 buflen, recvlen;
> > + u32 recvlen;
> > u64 requestid;
> > u8 execute_shutdown = false;
> > + int ret = 0;
> >
> > struct shutdown_msg_data *shutdown_msg;
> >
> > struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
> > struct icmsg_negotiate *negop = NULL;
> >
> > - buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
> > - buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > + buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
> >
> > - vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
> > + if (!buf) {
> > + printk(KERN_INFO
> > + "Unable to allocate memory for shutdown_onchannelcallback");
> > + return;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
> >
> > - if (recvlen > 0) {
> > + if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
> > DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "shutdown packet: len=%d, requestid=%lld",
> > recvlen, requestid);
> >
> > @@ -151,17 +157,23 @@ static void timesync_onchannelcallback(void *context)
> > {
> > struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
> > u8 *buf;
> > - u32 buflen, recvlen;
> > + u32 recvlen;
> > u64 requestid;
> > struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
> > struct ictimesync_data *timedatap;
> > + int ret = 0;
> >
> > - buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
> > - buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > + buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
> >
> > - vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
> > + if (!buf) {
> > + printk(KERN_INFO
> > + "Unable to allocate memory for timesync_onchannelcallback");
> > + return;
> > + }
> >
> > - if (recvlen > 0) {
> > + ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
> > +
> > + if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
> > DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "timesync packet: recvlen=%d, requestid=%lld",
> > recvlen, requestid);
> >
> > @@ -197,17 +209,23 @@ static void heartbeat_onchannelcallback(void *context)
> > {
> > struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
> > u8 *buf;
> > - u32 buflen, recvlen;
> > + u32 recvlen;
> > u64 requestid;
> > struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
> > struct heartbeat_msg_data *heartbeat_msg;
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
> >
> > - buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
> > - buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > + if (!buf) {
> > + printk(KERN_INFO
> > + "Unable to allocate memory for heartbeat_onchannelcallback");
> > + return;
> > + }
> >
> > - vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
> > + ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
> >
> > - if (recvlen > 0) {
> > + if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
> > DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "heartbeat packet: len=%d, requestid=%lld",
> > recvlen, requestid);
> >
> I am wondering if it might be better to allocate a page during module
> startup for dealing with some of these services. Since the protocol
> guarantees that there cannot be more than one outstanding request from
> the host side, having a pre-allocated receive buffer would be a more
> robust solution - we don't have to allocate memory when we cannot afford
> to sleep and thereby don't have to deal with a class of failure
> conditions that are not easy to deal with. For instance not being able
> to shut the guest down because of low memory situation would be bad.
>
IMVHO; nicer to have a module fail at load time with ENOMEM than having
failures later. If memory requirement is known at load time (and is fairly
low), just allocate what's needed then and then there's no unexpected
failure later.
--
Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net> http://www.chaosbits.net/
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] Properly check return values of kmalloc and vmbus_recvpacket
2010-12-09 20:23 [PATCH 1/1] Properly check return values of kmalloc and vmbus_recvpacket Hank Janssen
@ 2010-12-10 0:13 ` Ky Srinivasan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ky Srinivasan @ 2010-12-10 0:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: zbr, devel, virtualization, hjanssen, gregkh, linux-kernel; +Cc: Haiyang Zhang
>>> On 12/9/2010 at 3:23 PM, in message
<1291926209-17120-1-git-send-email-hjanssen@microsoft.com>, Hank Janssen
<hjanssen@microsoft.com> wrote:
> Correct ugly oversight, we need to check the return values of kmalloc
> and vmbus_recvpacket and return if they fail. I also tightened up the
> call to kmalloc.
>
> Thanks to Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@ioremap.net> for pointing this out.
>
> Signed-off-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
> Signed-off-by: Hank Janssen <hjanssen@microsoft.com>
>
> ---
> drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c b/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
> index 53e1e29..ac68575 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
> @@ -43,21 +43,27 @@ static void shutdown_onchannelcallback(void *context)
> {
> struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
> u8 *buf;
> - u32 buflen, recvlen;
> + u32 recvlen;
> u64 requestid;
> u8 execute_shutdown = false;
> + int ret = 0;
>
> struct shutdown_msg_data *shutdown_msg;
>
> struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
> struct icmsg_negotiate *negop = NULL;
>
> - buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
> - buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> + buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
>
> - vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
> + if (!buf) {
> + printk(KERN_INFO
> + "Unable to allocate memory for shutdown_onchannelcallback");
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
>
> - if (recvlen > 0) {
> + if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
> DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "shutdown packet: len=%d, requestid=%lld",
> recvlen, requestid);
>
> @@ -151,17 +157,23 @@ static void timesync_onchannelcallback(void *context)
> {
> struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
> u8 *buf;
> - u32 buflen, recvlen;
> + u32 recvlen;
> u64 requestid;
> struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
> struct ictimesync_data *timedatap;
> + int ret = 0;
>
> - buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
> - buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> + buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
>
> - vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
> + if (!buf) {
> + printk(KERN_INFO
> + "Unable to allocate memory for timesync_onchannelcallback");
> + return;
> + }
>
> - if (recvlen > 0) {
> + ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
> +
> + if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
> DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "timesync packet: recvlen=%d, requestid=%lld",
> recvlen, requestid);
>
> @@ -197,17 +209,23 @@ static void heartbeat_onchannelcallback(void *context)
> {
> struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
> u8 *buf;
> - u32 buflen, recvlen;
> + u32 recvlen;
> u64 requestid;
> struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
> struct heartbeat_msg_data *heartbeat_msg;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
>
> - buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
> - buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> + if (!buf) {
> + printk(KERN_INFO
> + "Unable to allocate memory for heartbeat_onchannelcallback");
> + return;
> + }
>
> - vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
> + ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
>
> - if (recvlen > 0) {
> + if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
> DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "heartbeat packet: len=%d, requestid=%lld",
> recvlen, requestid);
>
I am wondering if it might be better to allocate a page during module startup for dealing with some of these services. Since the protocol guarantees that there cannot be more than one outstanding request from the host side, having a pre-allocated receive buffer would be a more robust solution - we don't have to allocate memory when we cannot afford to sleep and thereby don't have to deal with a class of failure conditions that are not easy to deal with. For instance not being able to shut the guest down because of low memory situation would be bad.
Regards,
K. Y
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] Properly check return values of kmalloc and vmbus_recvpacket
@ 2010-12-10 0:13 ` Ky Srinivasan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ky Srinivasan @ 2010-12-10 0:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: zbr, devel, virtualization, hjanssen, gregkh, linux-kernel; +Cc: Haiyang Zhang
>>> On 12/9/2010 at 3:23 PM, in message
<1291926209-17120-1-git-send-email-hjanssen@microsoft.com>, Hank Janssen
<hjanssen@microsoft.com> wrote:
> Correct ugly oversight, we need to check the return values of kmalloc
> and vmbus_recvpacket and return if they fail. I also tightened up the
> call to kmalloc.
>
> Thanks to Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@ioremap.net> for pointing this out.
>
> Signed-off-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
> Signed-off-by: Hank Janssen <hjanssen@microsoft.com>
>
> ---
> drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c b/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
> index 53e1e29..ac68575 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/hv/hv_utils.c
> @@ -43,21 +43,27 @@ static void shutdown_onchannelcallback(void *context)
> {
> struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
> u8 *buf;
> - u32 buflen, recvlen;
> + u32 recvlen;
> u64 requestid;
> u8 execute_shutdown = false;
> + int ret = 0;
>
> struct shutdown_msg_data *shutdown_msg;
>
> struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
> struct icmsg_negotiate *negop = NULL;
>
> - buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
> - buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> + buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
>
> - vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
> + if (!buf) {
> + printk(KERN_INFO
> + "Unable to allocate memory for shutdown_onchannelcallback");
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
>
> - if (recvlen > 0) {
> + if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
> DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "shutdown packet: len=%d, requestid=%lld",
> recvlen, requestid);
>
> @@ -151,17 +157,23 @@ static void timesync_onchannelcallback(void *context)
> {
> struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
> u8 *buf;
> - u32 buflen, recvlen;
> + u32 recvlen;
> u64 requestid;
> struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
> struct ictimesync_data *timedatap;
> + int ret = 0;
>
> - buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
> - buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> + buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
>
> - vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
> + if (!buf) {
> + printk(KERN_INFO
> + "Unable to allocate memory for timesync_onchannelcallback");
> + return;
> + }
>
> - if (recvlen > 0) {
> + ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
> +
> + if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
> DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "timesync packet: recvlen=%d, requestid=%lld",
> recvlen, requestid);
>
> @@ -197,17 +209,23 @@ static void heartbeat_onchannelcallback(void *context)
> {
> struct vmbus_channel *channel = context;
> u8 *buf;
> - u32 buflen, recvlen;
> + u32 recvlen;
> u64 requestid;
> struct icmsg_hdr *icmsghdrp;
> struct heartbeat_msg_data *heartbeat_msg;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + buf = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
>
> - buflen = PAGE_SIZE;
> - buf = kmalloc(buflen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> + if (!buf) {
> + printk(KERN_INFO
> + "Unable to allocate memory for heartbeat_onchannelcallback");
> + return;
> + }
>
> - vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, buflen, &recvlen, &requestid);
> + ret = vmbus_recvpacket(channel, buf, PAGE_SIZE, &recvlen, &requestid);
>
> - if (recvlen > 0) {
> + if (ret == 0 && recvlen > 0) {
> DPRINT_DBG(VMBUS, "heartbeat packet: len=%d, requestid=%lld",
> recvlen, requestid);
>
I am wondering if it might be better to allocate a page during module startup for dealing with some of these services. Since the protocol guarantees that there cannot be more than one outstanding request from the host side, having a pre-allocated receive buffer would be a more robust solution - we don't have to allocate memory when we cannot afford to sleep and thereby don't have to deal with a class of failure conditions that are not easy to deal with. For instance not being able to shut the guest down because of low memory situation would be bad.
Regards,
K. Y
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH 1/1] Properly check return values of kmalloc and vmbus_recvpacket
2010-12-10 0:10 ` Jesper Juhl
@ 2010-12-10 0:20 ` Hank Janssen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Hank Janssen @ 2010-12-10 0:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jesper Juhl, Ky Srinivasan
Cc: zbr, devel, virtualization, gregkh, linux-kernel, Haiyang Zhang
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jesper Juhl [mailto:jj@chaosbits.net]
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 4:11 PM
> On Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Ky Srinivasan wrote:
> > I am wondering if it might be better to allocate a page during module
> > startup for dealing with some of these services. Since the protocol
> > guarantees that there cannot be more than one outstanding request from
> > the host side, having a pre-allocated receive buffer would be a more
> > robust solution - we don't have to allocate memory when we cannot
> > afford to sleep and thereby don't have to deal with a class of failure
> > conditions that are not easy to deal with. For instance not being able
> > to shut the guest down because of low memory situation would be bad.
> >
>
> IMVHO; nicer to have a module fail at load time with ENOMEM than having
> failures later. If memory requirement is known at load time (and is fairly low),
> just allocate what's needed then and then there's no unexpected failure
> later.
Agreed, That is a way neater implementation. I will correct and resubmit.
Thanks,
Hank.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH 1/1] Properly check return values of kmalloc and vmbus_recvpacket
@ 2010-12-10 0:20 ` Hank Janssen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Hank Janssen @ 2010-12-10 0:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jesper Juhl, Ky Srinivasan
Cc: Haiyang Zhang, gregkh, linux-kernel, virtualization, devel, zbr
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jesper Juhl [mailto:jj@chaosbits.net]
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 4:11 PM
> On Thu, 9 Dec 2010, Ky Srinivasan wrote:
> > I am wondering if it might be better to allocate a page during module
> > startup for dealing with some of these services. Since the protocol
> > guarantees that there cannot be more than one outstanding request from
> > the host side, having a pre-allocated receive buffer would be a more
> > robust solution - we don't have to allocate memory when we cannot
> > afford to sleep and thereby don't have to deal with a class of failure
> > conditions that are not easy to deal with. For instance not being able
> > to shut the guest down because of low memory situation would be bad.
> >
>
> IMVHO; nicer to have a module fail at load time with ENOMEM than having
> failures later. If memory requirement is known at load time (and is fairly low),
> just allocate what's needed then and then there's no unexpected failure
> later.
Agreed, That is a way neater implementation. I will correct and resubmit.
Thanks,
Hank.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-12-10 0:25 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-12-09 20:23 [PATCH 1/1] Properly check return values of kmalloc and vmbus_recvpacket Hank Janssen
2010-12-10 0:13 ` Ky Srinivasan
2010-12-10 0:13 ` Ky Srinivasan
2010-12-10 0:10 ` Jesper Juhl
2010-12-10 0:20 ` Hank Janssen
2010-12-10 0:20 ` Hank Janssen
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.