netdev - Re: [net-next V9 PATCH 00/16] XDP redirect memory return API

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 4 Apr 2018 10:41:18 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bjorn.topel@...el.com, magnus.karlsson@...el.com,
        Eugenia Emantayev <eugenia@...lanox.com>, jasowang@...hat.com,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Gal Pressman <galp@...lanox.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <borkmann@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next V9 PATCH 00/16] XDP redirect memory return API

On 04/03/2018 07:03 PM, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 9:23 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>> From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
>> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 18:07:16 +0200
>>> On Tue, 03 Apr 2018 10:54:27 -0400 (EDT)
>>> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don't worry, just resubmit when net-next opens back up.
>>>
>>> At that point in time, should I got back to posting it against the
>>> bpf-next git-tree again? Any preferences from Mellanox or BPF-guys?
>>
>> I have no personal preference, although it's probably best to go
>> through the bpf-next tree.

I'm fine either way as well.

>>> ... It have been a bit of a pain to keep track of driver changes in
>>> net-next, and waiting for them to get merged into bpf-next.
>>
>> I totally understand :)
> 
> it depends on how often bpf-next gets synced with net-next, mlx5
> constantly changes and
> I can't gurantee no merge conflicts will occur.

We push out bpf and bpf-next typically once a week to sync, but in case
of potential merge conflict or a dependency that we need to pull into
bpf-next we can always push it out immediately and re-sync if we get a
heads up.