netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/1] net sched actions: dump more than TCA_ACT_MAX

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: <20170417170453.GC1895@nanopsycho.orion>
Date:   Mon, 17 Apr 2017 19:04:53 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/1] net sched actions: dump more than
 TCA_ACT_MAX_PRIO actions per batch

Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 06:46:17PM CEST, jhs@...atatu.com wrote:
>On 17-04-17 11:31 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 03:10:59PM CEST, eric.dumazet@...il.com wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2017-04-17 at 07:01 -0400, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>
>> Agreed.
>> 
>> Plus the argument that attributes are "a big waste" sounds to me really
>> silly. What is couple of bytes?Please do this properly, as it should
>> be done.
>
>Jiri - you wanted to have these uapi discussions, right? ;->
>
>Of course it is trivial to add this as attributes and 32 bits
>for this case is not a big deal because it is done once. I want to talk
>about the pads instead ;-> What do you suggest we do with pads?

I believe we should leave them as they are.


>
>cheers,
>jaaml
>