netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/4] net: drop netif_attrmask

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]

Message-ID: <20221003172953.128735bf@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 3 Oct 2022 17:29:53 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>,
        Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
        Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] net: drop netif_attrmask_next*()

On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 17:07:31 -0700 Yury Norov wrote:
> > I see. Is that patch merged and on it's way?  
> 
> This patch is already in pull request.
> 
> > Perhaps we can just revert it and try again after the merge window?  
> 
> I don't understand this. To me it looks fairly normal - the check has
> been fixed and merged (likely) in -rc1. After that we have 2 month to
> spot, fix and test all issues discovered with correct cpumask_check().
> 
> I'm not insisting in moving this series in -rc1. Let's give it review
> and careful testing, and merge in -rc2, 3 or whatever is appropriate.
> 
> Regarding cpumask_check() patch - I'd like to have it in -rc1 because
> it will give people enough time to test their code...

AFAIU you can keep the cpumask_check() patch, we just need to revert
the netdev patch from your earlier series?

If so I strongly prefer that we revert the broken cleanup rather than
try to pile on more re-factoring. The trees are not going anywhere, we 
can queue the patches for 6.2.