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, 13 Apr 2022 12:46:02 -0700
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     Yan Zhu <zhuyan34@...wei.com>, andrii@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com, kafai@...com,
        keescook@...omium.org, kpsingh@...nel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        liucheng32@...wei.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        nixiaoming@...wei.com, songliubraving@...com,
        xiechengliang1@...wei.com, yhs@...com, yzaikin@...gle.com,
        zengweilin@...wei.com, leeyou.li@...wei.com,
        laiyuanyuan.lai@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 sysctl-next] bpf: move bpf sysctls from
 kernel/sysctl.c to bpf module

On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 09:40:58PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 4/13/22 9:00 PM, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 04:45:00PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > > On 4/7/22 9:07 AM, Yan Zhu wrote:
> > > > We're moving sysctls out of kernel/sysctl.c as its a mess. We
> > > > already moved all filesystem sysctls out. And with time the goal is
> > > > to move all sysctls out to their own subsystem/actual user.
> > > > 
> > > > kernel/sysctl.c has grown to an insane mess and its easy to run
> > > > into conflicts with it. The effort to move them out is part of this.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yan Zhu <zhuyan34@...wei.com>
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
> > > 
> > > Given the desire is to route this via sysctl-next and we're not shortly
> > > before but after the merge win, could we get a feature branch for bpf-next
> > > to pull from to avoid conflicts with ongoing development cycle?
> > 
> > Sure thing. So I've never done this sort of thing, so forgive me for
> > being new at it. Would it make sense to merge this change to sysctl-next
> > as-is today and put a frozen branch sysclt-next-bpf to reflect this,
> > which bpf-next can merge. And then sysctl-next just continues to chug on
> > its own? As-is my goal is to keep sysctl-next as immutable as well.
> > 
> > Or is there a better approach you can recommend?
> 
> Are you able to merge the pr/bpf-sysctl branch into your sysctl-next tree?
> 
>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git/log/?h=pr/bpf-sysctl
> 
> This is based off common base for both trees (3123109284176b1532874591f7c81f3837bbdc17)
> so should only pull in the single commit then.

Yup. That worked just fine. I pushed it.

  Luis

Powered by blists - more mailing lists