netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ipv6: sr: fix IPv6 initialization failure without lwtunnels

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2016 11:31:52 -0500 (EST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     roopa@...ulusnetworks.com
Cc:     david.lebrun@...ouvain.be, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        lorenzo@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ipv6: sr: fix IPv6 initialization failure
 without lwtunnels

From: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:49:19 -0800

> On 11/15/16, 7:18 AM, David Miller wrote:
>> Although I'd like to entertain the idea of making LWTUNNEL
>> unconditionally built and considered a fundamental piece of
>> networking infrastructure just like net/core/dst.c
> ok, ack. I can submit a patch for that. But, I had the lwtunnel infra hooks in
> CONFIG_LWTUNNEL to reduce the cost of hooks in the default fast path when it was not enabled.
> Will need to re-evaluate the cost of the hooks in the default fast-path.
 ...
> I am assuming you are ok with various encaps staying in their
> respective configs (mpls iptunnels, ila, and now ipv6 segment
> routing).

Yes.