netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/27] Allow passing of VLAN CFI bit through network stack

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: <20170103233604.emtqvyb7zj22cvgg@rere.qmqm.pl>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2017 00:36:04 +0100
From:   Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/27] Allow passing of VLAN CFI bit through
 network stack

On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 12:21:51AM +0100, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 04:32:17PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
> > Date: Tue,  3 Jan 2017 21:52:33 +0100 (CET)
> > 
> > > Dear NetDevs
> > > 
> > > This series removes an abuse of VLAN CFI bit in Linux networking stack.
> > > Currently Linux always clears the bit on outgoing traffic and presents
> > > it cleared to userspace (even via AF_PACKET/tcpdump when hw-accelerated).
> > > 
> > > This uses a new vlan_present bit in struct skbuff, and removes an assumption
> > > that vlan_proto != 0 when VLAN tag is present.
> > > 
> > > As I can't test most of the driver changes, please look at them carefully.
> > > 
> > > The series is supposed to be bisect-friendly and that requires temporary
> > > insertion of #define VLAN_TAG_PRESENT in BPF code to be able to split
> > > JIT changes per architecture.
> > > 
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Michał Mirosław
> > > 
> > > v2: rebase onto net-next
> > 
> > This patch series is really way too large.
> > 
> > You're going to have to find a way to combine related changes, or submit
> > this as a series of logical sets, one at a time.
> 
> The dependency graph is really sparse: main patch 25 depends on all previous,
> 19-23 all depend only on 18 and 26 depends on 25.
> 
> That's it. So the question is: how would it be easier for you to manage?

Ah, I forgot about patches 1-2 that most depend on... So if you get those two
early, then most others can be split.

Best Regards,
Michał Mirosław