netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 0/5] net: ipqess: introduce Qualcomm IPQESS driver

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:   Sat, 17 Sep 2022 11:02:02 +0200
From:   Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc:     "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com" <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Luka Perkov <luka.perkov@...tura.hr>,
        Robert Marko <robert.marko@...tura.hr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 0/5] net: ipqess: introduce Qualcomm IPQESS
 driver

On Sat, 17 Sep 2022 00:20:31 +0000
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 05:24:49PM +0200, Maxime Chevallier wrote:
> > The DSA out-of-band tagging is still using the skb->headroom part,
> > but there doesn't seem to be any better way for now without adding
> > fields to struct sk_buff.  
> 
> Are we on the same page about what is meant by "skb extensions"? See
> what is provided by CONFIG_SKB_EXTENSIONS, I did not mean it as in
> "extend struct sk_buff with new fields".

Yep, that was one of the other approaches I had in mind, and I've
submitted a series adding fields to sk_buff in the past which was
rejected (for good reasons). But indeed that comment on the cover-letter
was misleading...

Thanks,

Maxime