From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33377) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDpod-0005Bc-K4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 04:44:08 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDpoZ-00040F-Mv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 04:44:07 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:59202) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDpoZ-000409-Ge for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 04:44:03 -0500 References: <1480678088-21464-1-git-send-email-ppandit@redhat.com> From: Jason Wang Message-ID: Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 17:43:57 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] net: virtio-net: initialise local 'netcfg' variable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: P J P Cc: Azureyang , Qemu Developers On 2016=E5=B9=B412=E6=9C=8805=E6=97=A5 17:10, P J P wrote: > Hello Jason, > > +-- On Mon, 5 Dec 2016, Jason Wang wrote --+ > | > diff --git a/hw/net/virtio-net.c b/hw/net/virtio-net.c > | > index 01f1351..cb5b3dc 100644 > | > --- a/hw/net/virtio-net.c > | > +++ b/hw/net/virtio-net.c > | > @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static int vq2q(int queue_index) > | > static void virtio_net_get_config(VirtIODevice *vdev, uint8_t *co= nfig) > | > { > | > VirtIONet *n =3D VIRTIO_NET(vdev); > | > - struct virtio_net_config netcfg; > | > + struct virtio_net_config netcfg =3D {}; > | > > | > virtio_stw_p(vdev, &netcfg.status, n->status); > | > virtio_stw_p(vdev, &netcfg.max_virtqueue_pairs, n->max_queues= ); > | > | Good catch but since mtu patch wasn't accepted so mtu were in fact no= t exposed > | to guest. > > 'mtu' appears to have been added by commit 'dbdfea9226c9d0bdd', could y= ou > pleae confirm? Yes. > > | (FYI, you can have a look at Maxime patch, he did a stw_p here()). > > + virtio_stw_p(vdev, &netcfg.mtu, n->mtu); > + > > Yes, but this isn't accepted yet, is it? > > > Thank you. > -- > Prasad J Pandit / Red Hat Product Security Team > 47AF CE69 3A90 54AA 9045 1053 DD13 3D32 FE5B 041F > See feature_sizes[] in virtio-net.c, we won't expose mtu to guest until=20 MTU feature were negotiated. Thanks