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, 4 Jul 2022 19:13:53 +0200
From:   Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@...hat.com>
To:     Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>,
        Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
Cc:     brouer@...hat.com, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@...el.com>,
        Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn@...nel.org>,
        Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
        Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>,
        Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
        Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
        Yajun Deng <yajun.deng@...ux.dev>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        xdp-hints@...-project.net
Subject: Re: [xdp-hints] Re: [PATCH RFC bpf-next 00/52] bpf, xdp: introduce
 and use Generic Hints/metadata


On 04/07/2022 17.44, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>> Agreed. This incremental approach is basically what Jesper's
>> simultaneous series makes a start on, AFAICT? Would be nice if y'all
>> could converge the efforts :) >
> I don't know why at some point Jesper decided to go on his own as he
> for sure was using our tree as a base for some time, dunno what
> happened then. Regarding these two particular submissions, I didn't
> see Jesper's RFC when sending mine, only after when I went to read
> some stuff.
> 

Well, I have written to you (offlist) that the git tree didn't compile,
so I had a hard time getting it into a working state.  We had a
ping-pong of stuff to fix, but it wasn't and you basically told me to
switch to using LLVM to compile your kernel tree, I was not interested
in doing that.

I have looked at the code in your GitHub tree, and decided that it was
an over-engineered approach IMHO.  Also simply being 52 commits deep
without having posted this incrementally upstream were also a
non-starter for me, as this isn't the way-to-work upstream.

To get the ball rolling, I have implemented the base XDP-hints support
here[1] with only 9 patches (including support for two drivers).

IMHO we need to start out small and not intermix these huge refactoring
patches.  E.g. I'm not convinced renaming net/{core/xdp.c => bpf/core.c}
is an improvement.

-Jesper

[1] 
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/165643378969.449467.13237011812569188299.stgit@firesoul/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ