From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-oo1-f47.google.com (mail-oo1-f47.google.com [209.85.161.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 961431945F for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2023 15:32:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Ki7lkEiq" Received: by mail-oo1-f47.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-58d54612d9cso1246919eaf.1 for ; Fri, 01 Dec 2023 07:32:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1701444770; x=1702049570; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references:to:from :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=jo45pgpAsT/fYAMvIFhy3WxKzSkIahtacQvjcSvodfQ=; b=Ki7lkEiqQwInIdqYskRmuFgAk/D1foU1CL4sFvkXkQIpkP4wzv2MdtQP2YqSKcY07T /xsCvukVhp3FBqzRTMkNciFPJuFXOzxl1NC9zAPZm6k+NS6JSue+hre8wGgIHmVd31aC jXZ6nGNE5MP0Mo08BBC5gv83ABRNxtvLXAGes1I/GES4nNTX1J8/puOKLMUI8lBe/3af 893OmUitnuyzWQ+vsctse0EZiggD+95x8RRqNaZ9xd+DUa9jGtuqX8nUP2wTRrzBiqae mYgQxNkvq6ziC1UhAHwqgzdXGDLhYYXQDrwK3WcdDf4Vq12yGFcs5rraLcgm/keDcNBZ 7NIQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1701444770; x=1702049570; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references:to:from :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=jo45pgpAsT/fYAMvIFhy3WxKzSkIahtacQvjcSvodfQ=; b=YzZCkxyTt8YUaeU/Ek/8Jiqe+c8wKwQMrtzY5voeYBW2VNaPWnf+kXrPTC9QG1f9xs t2iORKaA4c4VRYYrvXeDgrA11TiHW1Dg4LTqabva+0lU9OjmZdn8cmiyZTaMS81shCuA 0Tv53rgsTcNrO0Im6ZZgDqtPMwTYypS26y9nRNSZ7heG2JJ4KHCwkiD57LLfG/d57Sk8 CehyfjalfrZGAIkv38dPbNd7N7e4yb1fJC/TqZeLPwOBNkPu2hPOqoqlhI4vRETkJgpC qWbKUjz+4Wo/aF+mbhUkzoHFuvJX9H8WAUhezs1YC/m+2JcvC0aSR/ApiyE28Js6HKLl gIHA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yzv14fD25mb7fBaamuqqEgnhiLiQQRUdoqyFncyrIFmkmpzqmEM bq2hCnnfV9vDuhCetz3DfeQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHxOOWKa3c6s7xhvnbs5nBwweq4xcT6mUngAn0+9DW24fpw+sXhaM+HR1gkkYtTfyuluq2Zog== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6359:150a:b0:170:73d:fce9 with SMTP id jt10-20020a056359150a00b00170073dfce9mr4166686rwb.16.1701444769562; Fri, 01 Dec 2023 07:32:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.102.4.159] (50-78-19-50-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [50.78.19.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bu17-20020ad455f1000000b0067aa1068670sm285452qvb.11.2023.12.01.07.32.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 01 Dec 2023 07:32:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <6a803951-646d-4fbc-87e8-44b8c3a6436b@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 07:32:46 -0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iwd@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] handshake: Add cleanup function for handshake_state Content-Language: en-US From: James Prestwood To: Denis Kenzior , iwd@lists.linux.dev References: <20231201040020.161143-1-denkenz@gmail.com> <43b52716-991d-436b-b1b6-a6d9d459ff8c@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <43b52716-991d-436b-b1b6-a6d9d459ff8c@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 12/1/23 07:22, James Prestwood wrote: > Hi Denis, > > On 12/1/23 07:08, Denis Kenzior wrote: >> Hi James, >> >> On 12/1/23 06:42, James Prestwood wrote: >>> Hi Denis, >>> >>> On 11/30/23 20:00, Denis Kenzior wrote: >>>> To allow _auto_(handshake_state_free) variables to be used. >>>> --- >>>>   src/handshake.c | 7 ++++++- >>>>   src/handshake.h | 3 +++ >>>>   2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> All LGTM >>> >> >> Any ideas why testPSK-roam tests are failing?  They seem to be quite >> flaky on my machine as well, passing only 4/9?  Doesn't seem related >> to this series though? >> >> |     testPSK-roam    |   4    |   5    |    0    | 256.84 | > > Not seeing that on my end (with and without your patches). The > packet-loss roam tests is always flaky on the CI, but I've never seen > that many failures. > > What UML kernel are you running so I can take that out of the equation? Nvm, I'm getting the 4 failures on a 6.6 kernel now. Something must have changed so I'll look into it. > >> >> >> Regards, >> -Denis >>