netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/8] net: bridge: add flush filtering 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 11 Apr 2022 17:03:56 -0600
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
To:     Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>
Cc:     Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        idosch@...sch.org, kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/8] net: bridge: add flush filtering support

On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 12:22:24PM -0700, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
> all great points. My only reason to explore RTM_DELNEIGH is to see if we can
> find a recipe to support similar bulk deletes of other objects handled via
> rtm msgs in the future. Plus, it allows you to maintain symmetry between
> flush requests and object delete notification msg types.
> 
> Lets see if there are other opinions.

I guess I should have read the entire thread. :-) (still getting used to
the new lei + mutt workflow). This was my thought - bulk delete is going
to be a common need, and it is really just a mass delete. The GET
message types are used for dumps and some allow attributes on the
request as a means of coarse grain filtering. I think we should try
something similar here for the flush case.