netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 04/16] net: Add BPF_XDP_EGRESS as a bpf_attach

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: <87368v8qnr.fsf@toke.dk>
Date:   Wed, 22 Apr 2020 17:51:36 +0200
From:   Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        prashantbhole.linux@...il.com, jasowang@...hat.com,
        brouer@...hat.com, toshiaki.makita1@...il.com,
        daniel@...earbox.net, john.fastabend@...il.com, ast@...nel.org,
        kafai@...com, songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com, andriin@...com,
        David Ahern <dahern@...italocean.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 04/16] net: Add BPF_XDP_EGRESS as a bpf_attach_type

David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> writes:

> On 4/22/20 9:27 AM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> And as I said in the beginning, I'm perfectly happy to be told why I'm
>> wrong; but so far you have just been arguing that I'm out of scope ;)
>
> you are arguing about a suspected bug with existing code that is no way
> touched or modified by this patch set, so yes it is out of scope.

Your patch is relying on the (potentially buggy) behaviour, so I don't
think it's out of scope to mention it in this context.

> The proper way to discuss a bug in existing code is a thread focused on
> that topic, not buried inside comments on a patch set.

I'm fine with starting a new thread; will do (but as I said, tomorrow).

-Toke