netdev - Re: [PATCH iproute2] tc: flower: fix json output with mpls lse

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:   Mon, 11 Jan 2021 11:57:44 +0100
From:   Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2] tc: flower: fix json output with mpls lse

On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 10:39:03AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 1/7/21 10:13 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jan 2021 17:48:56 +0100 Guillaume Nault wrote:
> >> On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 11:25:32PM +0100, Guillaume Nault wrote:
> >>> The json output of the TCA_FLOWER_KEY_MPLS_OPTS attribute was invalid.
> >>>
> >>> Example:
> >>>
> >>>   $ tc filter add dev eth0 ingress protocol mpls_uc flower mpls \
> >>>       lse depth 1 label 100                                     \
> >>>       lse depth 2 label 200
> >>>
> >>>   $ tc -json filter show dev eth0 ingress
> >>>     ...{"eth_type":"8847",
> >>>         "  mpls":["    lse":["depth":1,"label":100],
> >>>                   "    lse":["depth":2,"label":200]]}...  
> >>
> >> Is there any problem with this patch?
> >> It's archived in patchwork, but still in state "new". Therefore I guess
> >> it was dropped before being considered for review.
> > 
> > Erm, that's weird. I think Alexei mentioned that auto-archiving is
> > turned on in the new netdevbpf patchwork instance. My guess is it got
> > auto archived :S
> > 
> > Here is the list of all patches that are Archived as New:
> > 
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?state=1&archive=true
> > 
> > Should any of these have been reviewed?
> > 
> 
> 
> Interesting. I thought some patches had magically disappeared - and some
> of those are in that list.

Okay, but, in the end, should I repost this patch?