netdev - Re: [PATCH iproute2-next] ss: Show zerocopy sendfile status of TLS sockets

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:   Tue, 31 May 2022 08:22:30 -0600
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...dia.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
        Boris Pismenny <borisp@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2-next] ss: Show zerocopy sendfile status of TLS
 sockets

On 5/31/22 1:00 AM, Maxim Mikityanskiy wrote:
> On 2022-05-30 19:24, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 May 2022 17:14:38 +0300
>> Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...dia.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +static void tcp_tls_zc_sendfile(struct rtattr *attr)
>>> +{
>>> +    out(" zerocopy_sendfile: %s", attr ? "active" : "inactive");
>>> +}
>>
>> I would prefer a shorter output just adding "zc_sendfile" if present
>> and nothing
>> if not present. That is how other optns like ecn, ecnseen, etc work.
> 
> I see David merged the patch as is to net-next, despite the comments.
> Should I still make the requested change? If yes, should I submit it as
> a v2 or as a next patch on top of this one?
> 

The patch was merged before the comments. Given that you should be
sending a patch against -next branch that addresses the comments.