netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/4] Take care of xfrm policy when checking dst entries

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, 17 Sep 2012 15:54:58 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com
Cc:	vyasevich@...il.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, sds@...ho.nsa.gov,
	james.l.morris@...cle.com, eparis@...isplace.org, sri@...ibm.com,
	linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/4] Take care of xfrm policy when checking
 dst entries

From: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 21:52:20 +0200

> Le 17/09/2012 20:25, David Miller a écrit :
>> From: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>
>> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 14:14:35 -0400
>>
>>> I think he expected you to take Eric's patch that removed those
>>> pieces.
>>
>> Eric's patch was a cleanup, so it went into 'net-next'.
>>
>> Nicolas's patch is a bonafide bug fix so needs to be
>> targetted at 'net'
> My fault, it was 'net-next'. I will rebase them against 'net'.
> 
> Should I post the last one (4/4) separately, against net-next? Because
> without the '3/4', the cleanup is a bit larger and will cause a
> conflict during the merge.

Actually Nicolas, hold off on this for a bit.

I'm reconsidering putting Eric's patch into 'net' and that would
allow me to use your v3 patches as-is.

Thanks.
--
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