netdev - Re: [PATCH v1 net-next 00/14] udp: Farewell to UDP-Lite.

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, 31 May 2023 08:24:02 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>, davem@...emloft.net, 
	dsahern@...nel.org, kuni1840@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 net-next 00/14] udp: Farewell to UDP-Lite.

On Tue, 2023-05-30 at 22:10 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 31 May 2023 06:25:33 +0200 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > Yes, if it's ok, it would be better to add a WARN_ONCE() to stable.
> > > 
> > > If we added it only in net-next, no one might notice it and we could
> > > remove UDP-Lite before the warning is available in the next LTS stable
> > > tree.  
> > 
> > WARN_ONCE() will fire a syzbot report.
> > 
> > Honestly I do not  think UDP-Lite is a significant burden.
> > 
> > What about instead adding a CONFIG_UDPLITE and default it to
> > "CONFIG_UDPLITE is not set" ?
> > 
> > And add a static key, with /proc/sys/net/core/udplite_enable to
> > eventually save some cycles in various fast paths
> > and let the user opt-in, in case it is using a distro kernel. with
> > CONFIG_UDPLITE=y
> 
> oohm, fair point user-reachable WARN() is a liability.

What about a plain pr_warn_once() banner, verbose enough to be
noticeable? Alike:

https://lwn.net/ml/linux-fsdevel/20220225125445.29942-1-jack@suse.cz/


Cheers,

Paolo