netdev - Re: Why revert commit 2271c95 ("vrf: mark skb for multicast or link-local as enslaved to VRF")?

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201019123804.GD11729@ICIPI.localdomain>
Date:   Mon, 19 Oct 2020 08:38:04 -0400
From:   Stephen Suryaputra <ssuryaextr@...il.com>
To:     Mike Manning <mmanning@...tta.att-mail.com>
Cc:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        sashal@...nel.org
Subject: Re: Why revert commit 2271c95 ("vrf: mark skb for multicast or
 link-local as enslaved to VRF")?

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 01:24:26PM +0100, Mike Manning wrote:
> To clarify, the regression in 4.14 only occurred when the commit was
> used in isolation, not when applied with the rest of the series.
> 
> It may be worth mentioning that we had been extensively using the series
> in our local fork with 4.14 & 4.19 kernels before proceeding with
> submitting the series and then switching to 5.x kernel, so that may be
> an approach you can take.
> 
Thanks Mike and David. Yes, I think it's best to use it in our local
4.14 fork.

Regards,
Stephen.