Il 16/04/2012 23:43, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
> For a 10 line test that enumerates the PCI device given the command line
> argument?
>
> Here's the thing, I just looked through the code and spotted what I
> think is a buffer overflow. It's hard to tell purely from code
> inspection. With just
On 04/16/2012 03:34 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/16/2012 03:14 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
The bits I'm more interested about is edge case testing (things that
could pose a security concern). Since WHQL interfaces at the expected
paths for the driver, it's unlikely that it can test any of this.
On 04/16/2012 03:14 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
The bits I'm more interested about is edge case testing (things that
could pose a security concern). Since WHQL interfaces at the expected
paths for the driver, it's unlikely that it can test any of this.
It does include fuzz tests.
But VMXNET3 is
On 04/16/2012 03:14 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
The bits I'm more interested about is edge case testing (things that
could pose a security concern). Since WHQL interfaces at the expected
paths for the driver, it's unlikely that it can test any of this.
It does include fuzz tests.
But VMXNET3 is
> The bits I'm more interested about is edge case testing (things that
> could pose a security concern). Since WHQL interfaces at the expected
> paths for the driver, it's unlikely that it can test any of this.
It does include fuzz tests.
> >> But VMXNET3 isn't really special here. From this po
On 04/16/2012 02:49 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Regarding the testing - we ran WHQL networking tests on the device.
If we provide the logs will it be sufficient? I believe the test
coverage is much more comprehensive than anything that we will do with
qtest.
I'm not sure I'd agree about comprehe
> > Regarding the testing - we ran WHQL networking tests on the device.
> > If we provide the logs will it be sufficient? I believe the test
> > coverage is much more comprehensive than anything that we will do with
> > qtest.
>
> I'm not sure I'd agree about comprehensive
Let's just say that pa
On 04/15/2012 04:16 AM, Yan Vugenfirer wrote:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/11/2012 02:08 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 11/04/2012 19:25, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
Off the top of my head: issues with v5:
polluting global namespace, must scope names
appropri
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/11/2012 02:08 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>> Il 11/04/2012 19:25, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
Off the top of my head: issues with v5:
polluting global namespace, must scope names
appropriately with vmxnet_ VM
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 11/04/2012 21:10, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
>> On 04/11/2012 02:08 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Il 11/04/2012 19:25, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
>
> Off the top of my head: issues with v5:
> polluting global namespace, must s
Il 11/04/2012 21:10, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
> On 04/11/2012 02:08 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 11/04/2012 19:25, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
Off the top of my head: issues with v5:
polluting global namespace, must scope names
appropriately with vmxnet_ VMXNET_ unless they
On 04/11/2012 02:08 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 11/04/2012 19:25, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
Off the top of my head: issues with v5:
polluting global namespace, must scope names
appropriately with vmxnet_ VMXNET_ unless they have file scope.
Don't use names with _ followed by an upper case let
Il 11/04/2012 19:25, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
>>
>> Off the top of my head: issues with v5:
>> polluting global namespace, must scope names
>> appropriately with vmxnet_ VMXNET_ unless they have file scope.
>> Don't use names with _ followed by an upper case letter
>> or that star with two under
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/10/2012 10:47 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Izik Eidus
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
>>> accomplished...
>>> What prevent us from progressing
On 04/10/2012 10:47 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Izik Eidus
wrote:
What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
accomplished...
What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
Hang on, I asked what the point of the VMware paravirt
On 04/04/2012 02:39 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 02:44:01PM +0300, Izik Eidus wrote:
Hi,
What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
accomplished...
What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
Thanks.
Off the top of my head: issues
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Yan Vugenfirer wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Izik Eidus
>> wrote:
>> > What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
>> > accomplished...
>> > What prevent us from progr
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 04:47:19PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Izik Eidus
>> wrote:
>> > What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
>> > accomplished...
>> > What prevent us f
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 04:47:19PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Izik Eidus
> wrote:
> > What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
> > accomplished...
> > What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
>
> Hang on, I asked what
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Izik Eidus
> wrote:
> > What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
> > accomplished...
> > What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
>
> Hang on, I asked what the po
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Izik Eidus
wrote:
> What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
> accomplished...
> What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
Hang on, I asked what the point of the VMware paravirt device models
is. I don't think that was eve
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
>
> On Wed, 4 Apr 2012, Izik Eidus wrote:
>>
>> What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
>> accomplished...
>> What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
>
>
> As already discussed on the list patch v
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Yan Vugenfirer wrote:
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
On Wed, 4 Apr 2012, Izik Eidus wrote:
What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
accomplished...
What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
As already
On Wed, 4 Apr 2012, Izik Eidus wrote:
What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
accomplished...
What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
As already discussed on the list patch v5 doesn't work at least for me.
Previous patches worked better but were not
Hi,
What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
accomplished...
What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
Thanks.
On 18/03/2012 11:27, Dmitry Fleytman wrote:
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Fleytman
Signed-off-by: Yan Vugenfirer
---
Makefile.objs |
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 02:44:01PM +0300, Izik Eidus wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What about this patch?, everything that was asked from Dmitry was
> accomplished...
> What prevent us from progressing with merging this patch?
>
> Thanks.
Off the top of my head: issues with v5:
polluting global namespace, mu
26 matches
Mail list logo
