linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 00/23][pull request] Queue configs and large buffer providers

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]

Message-ID: <20250819193126.2a4af62b@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 19:31:26 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Willem de
 Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 andrew+netdev@...n.ch, horms@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
 sdf@...ichev.me, almasrymina@...gle.com, dw@...idwei.uk,
 michael.chan@...adcom.com, dtatulea@...dia.com, ap420073@...il.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 00/23][pull request] Queue configs and large
 buffer providers

On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 14:57:16 +0100 Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> Jakub Kicinski (20):

I think we need to revisit how we operate.
When we started the ZC work w/ io-uring I suggested a permanent shared
branch. That's perhaps an overkill. What I did not expect is that you
will not even CC netdev@ on changes to io_uring/zcrx.*

I don't mean to assert any sort of ownership of that code, but you're
not meeting basic collaboration standards for the kernel. This needs 
to change first.
-- 
pw-bot: defer