netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 sysctl-next] bpf: move bpf sysctls from kernel/sysctl.c to bpf module

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 13 Apr 2022 21:50:57 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
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 4/13/22 9:46 PM, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> 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.

Great, thanks!