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: <20251117161439.1dedf4b6@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 16:14:39 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
 <ast@...erby.net>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Donald Hunter
 <donald.hunter@...il.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Jacob Keller
 <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 wireguard@...ts.zx2c4.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jordan Rife <jordan@...fe.io>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 00/11] wireguard: netlink: ynl conversion

On Wed, 12 Nov 2025 04:59:30 +0100 Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 06:07:46PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed,  5 Nov 2025 18:32:09 +0000 Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen wrote:  
> > > This series completes the implementation of YNL for wireguard,
> > > as previously announced[1].
> > > 
> > > This series consist of 5 parts:
> > > 1) Patch 01-03 - Misc. changes
> > > 2) Patch    04 - Add YNL specification for wireguard
> > > 3) Patch 05-07 - Transition to a generated UAPI header
> > > 4) Patch    08 - Adds a sample program for the generated C library
> > > 5) Patch 09-11 - Transition to generated netlink policy code
> > > 
> > > The main benefit of having a YNL specification is unlocked after the
> > > first 2 parts, the RFC version seems to already have spawned a new
> > > Rust netlink binding[2] using wireguard as it's main example.
> > > 
> > > Part 3 and 5 validates that the specification is complete and aligned,
> > > the generated code might have a few warts, but they don't matter too
> > > much, and are mostly a transitional problem[3].
> > > 
> > > Part 4 is possible after part 2, but is ordered after part 3,
> > > as it needs to duplicate the UAPI header in tools/include.  
> > 
> > These LGTM, now.
> > 
> > Jason what's your feeling here? AFAICT the changes to the wg code
> > are quite minor now.   
> 
> Reviewing it this week. Thanks for bumping this in my queue.

Sadness. We wait a week and no review materializes. I think the patches
are fine so I'll apply them shortly. The expected patch review SLA for
netdev sub-maintainers is 24h (excluding weekends and holidays)
https://docs.kernel.org/next/maintainer/feature-and-driver-maintainers.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ