[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160812152841.GP2695@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 11:28:41 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/3] bpf: Add bpf_current_task_under_cgroup
helper
Hello, Alexei.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 08:21:21AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > lol I should have read the whole thread before replying twice. Sorry
> > about that. Yeah, if we can still rename it, let's do "under". It's
> > more intuitive and gives us the room to implement the real "in" test
> > if ever necessary in the future.
>
> agree. Thanks for explaining 'in' vs 'under' terminology.
> since we can still rename skb_in_cgroup we should do it.
Sounds good to me.
> and since that was my only nit for this patch.
> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
FWIW,
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> All 3 patches should go via net-next and to avoid conflicts 1/3 can be
> in cgroup tree as well (if you think there will be conflicts).
> We did that in the past with tip and net-next and it worked out well.
Yeah, just route it through net-next. If other changes ever need it,
I'll include the commit in cgroup tree.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists