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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 12:43:40 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org> Cc: xiangxia.m.yue@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>, Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>, Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>, Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...filter.org>, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>, Akhmat Karakotov <hmukos@...dex-team.ru> Subject: Re: [net-next v4 0/3] use standard sysctl macro On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 07:44:12 -0700 Luis Chamberlain wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 03:01:38PM +0800, xiangxia.m.yue@...il.com wrote: > > From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@...il.com> > > > > This patchset introduce sysctl macro or replace var > > with macro. > > > > Tonghao Zhang (3): > > net: sysctl: use shared sysctl macro > > net: sysctl: introduce sysctl SYSCTL_THREE > > selftests/sysctl: add sysctl macro test > > I see these are based on net-next, to avoid conflicts with > sysctl development this may be best based on sysctl-next > though. Jakub? I guess the base should be whatever we are going to use as a base for a branch, the branch we can both pull in? How many patches like that do you see flying around, tho? I feel like I've seen at least 3 - netfilter, net core and bpf. It's starting to feel like we should have one patch that adds all the constants and self test, put that in a branch anyone can pull in, and then do the conversions in separate patches.. Option number two - rename the statics in the subsystems to SYSCTL_x, and we can do a much smaller cleanup in the next cycle which would replace those with a centralized instances? That should have minimal chance of conflicts so no need to do special branches. Option number three defer all this until the merge window.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists