netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 net 1/4] net: bonding: replace dev_trans_start() with the jiffies of the last ARP/NS

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, 2 Aug 2022 12:10:29 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@...hat.com>,
        Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
        Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net 1/4] net: bonding: replace dev_trans_start() with
 the jiffies of the last ARP/NS

On Tue, 02 Aug 2022 11:00:41 -0700 Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> >> Alternatively, would it be more comfortable to just put this
> >> patch (1/4) to stable and not backport the others?   
> >
> >The above works for me - I thought it was not ok for Jay, but since he
> >is proposing such sulution, I guess I was wrong.  
> 
> 	My original reluctance was that I hadn't had an opportunity to
> sufficiently review the patch set to think through the potential
> regressions.  There might be something I haven't thought of, but I think
> would only manifest in very unusual configurations.
> 
> 	I'm ok with applying the series to net-next when it's available,
> and backporting 1/4 for stable (and 4/4 with it, since that's the
> documentation update).
> 
> Acked-by: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>

One more time, sorry :) If I'm reading things right Vladimir and 
I would like this to be part of 5.20, Paolo is okay with that,
Jay would prefer to delay it until 5.21.

Is that right?

My preference for 5.20 is because we do have active users reporting
problems in stable, and by moving to 5.21 we're delaying things by
2 weeks. At the same time, 5.20 vs 5.21 doesn't matter as we intend 
to hit stable users with these change before either of those is out.