On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 10:42 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com> wrote: > > On 2024/04/08 16:40, Yuri Benditovich wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 4:30 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> On 2024/04/08 7:09, Yuri Benditovich wrote: > >>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 2:12 PM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> The peer buffer is qualified with const and not meant to be modified. > >>> > >>> IMHO, this buffer is not so 'const' (although the prototype states so), > >>> it is allocated in net.c > >>> btw, another procedure in this file also modifies the buffer > >>> (work_around_broken_dhclient) > >> > >> Right but it has a FIXME comment. > >> > >>> > >>>> It also prevents enabling VIRTIO_NET_F_HASH_REPORT for peers without > >>>> virtio-net header support. > >>> > >>> Does it mean _this commit_ prevents enabling VIRTIO_NET_F_HASH_REPORT > >>> for peers without > >>> virtio-net header support? Where? > >> > >> No, but I meant that this patch fixes such a problem. > > > > No, it does not. Such a problem does not exist in the master, the > > hash_report feature > > is silently dropped in such case: > > https://github.com/qemu/qemu/blob/master/hw/net/virtio-net.c#L816 > > Well, silently dropping VIRTIO_NET_F_HASH_REPORT is not different from > preventing enabling VIRTIO_NET_F_HASH_REPORT, is it? > But how is your patch involved in it? Should this line be removed from the commit message?
> Regards, > Akihiko Odaki
