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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20220831112150.36e503bd@kernel.org> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 11:21:50 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>, Stefan Schmidt <stefan@...enfreihafen.org>, linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ieee802154: Fix compilation error when CONFIG_IEEE802154_NL802154_EXPERIMENTAL is disabled On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 23:31:24 -0700 Jakub Kicinski wrote: > Hm, let me add 802154 folks. > > Either we should treat the commands as reserved in terms of uAPI > even if they get removed the IDs won't be reused, or they are for > testing purposes only. > > In the former case we should just remove the #ifdef around the values > in the enum, it just leads to #ifdef proliferation while having no > functional impact. > > In the latter case we should start error checking from the last > non-experimental command, as we don't care about breaking the > experimental ones. I haven't gone thru all of my inbox yet, but I see no reply from Stefan or Alexander. My vote is to un-hide the EXPERIMENTAL commands.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists