netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] net: sched: cls: add extack support

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:   Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:08:54 +0100
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>
Cc:     Alexander Aring <aring@...atatu.com>, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
        jiri@...nulli.us, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@...atatu.com, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        alexei.starovoitov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] net: sched: cls: add extack support

Hey David, and others, [+Alexei]

On 01/17/2018 12:27 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> On 18-01-16 05:41 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:12:57 -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>>> On 18-01-16 04:46 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:20:19 -0500, Alexander Aring wrote:
>>>
>>> [..]
>>>
>>> I would say precedence should be Jiri's patches, Alex's patches
>>> and then yours:
>>> Alex's patches fix the core (cls_api.c) area with proper extack
>>> for the core and then he has one patch to cover a specific
>>> use case of the u32 classifier extack. Yours is only concerned
>>> with one use case - bpf which depend on the core (that is in Alex's
>>> patches)
>>
>> Our patches are concerned with propagating the extack to drivers,
>> and nfp (and netdevsim) make use of it.
>>
>> I'm miffed by the fact that you jumped out with this conflicting series
>> *after* we posted ours, and we got shot down on white space.

So I've been looking over Quentin's series just now that sits in my
bucket and it looks fine to me, but merge with this one would probably
end up badly for David. Therefore I'm proposing the following that
should hopefully be fine and work out for Alexander and Jakub/Quentin
as a consensus:

I'm getting the current bpf-next stuff as PR out in a few minutes, so
David can pull this in and therefore net-next will also have the
dependency on nfp for Quentin's series. Then, given this one here
needs another respin anyway, I would suggest to combine the missing
patches from Alexander's series, and get it all out in a single patch
series directly for net-next w/o any interdependency hassle.

Thanks,
Daniel