netdev - Re: [RFC Patch net-next v2] net_sched: introduce eBPF based Qdisc

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: <CAM_iQpX2prCpPDmO1U0A_wyJi_LS4wmd9MQiFKiqQT8NfGNNnw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Sep 2021 20:59:40 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:     Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch net-next v2] net_sched: introduce eBPF based Qdisc

On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 11:18 AM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 6:27 PM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
> > ---
> > v2: Rebase on latest net-next
> >     Make the code more complete (but still incomplete)
>
> What is the point of v2 when feedback on the first RFC was ignored?

They are not ignored for two reasons:

1) I responded to those reasonable ones in the original thread. Clearly
you missed them.

2) I also responded in changelog, please check the difference, clearly
V2 is much more lengthy than V1.

It becomes clear you ignored mine (either email or changelog), not
vice versa.

Please lead by examples, you are not actually following anything you
ask others to do. Remember the last time I asked you to expand your
changelog for bpf timer? You kept ignoring it. ;)

Thanks.