netdev - Re: [DCCP] [RFC] [Patchv2 1/1]: Queuing policies -- reworked version of Tomasz's patch set

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: <20080428.003906.43331329.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 28 Apr 2008 00:39:06 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk
Cc:	tomasz@...belny.oswiecenia.net, dccp@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [DCCP] [RFC] [Patchv2 1/1]: Queuing policies -- reworked
 version of Tomasz's patch set

From: Gerrit Renker <gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:21:28 +0100

> Since I can currently not see the last point happen within DCCP, I think
> that the use of skb->priority for layer 4 (DCCP) is safe.

Ok.

> So the remaining question was whether maintainers would be okay with
> this "overloading" of the field (Arnaldo seems ok with it). 

I'm okay with it, thanks for the explanation and analysis.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html