netdev - Re: [PATCH net 0/8] Add support for two classes of VCAP rules

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:   Thu, 22 Dec 2022 17:12:10 +0100
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Steen Hegelund <steen.hegelund@...rochip.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Casper Andersson <casper.casan@...il.com>,
        Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
        Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@...o.com>,
        Nathan Huckleberry <nhuck@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com>,
        Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>,
        Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@...rochip.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/8] Add support for two classes of VCAP rules

On Thu, 2022-12-22 at 16:02 +0100, Steen Hegelund wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-12-22 at 15:22 +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > Despite the 'net' target, this looks really like net-next material as
> > most patches look like large refactor. I see there are a bunch of fixes
> > in patches 3-8, but quite frankly it's not obvious at all what the
> > refactors/new features described into the commit messages themself
> > really fix.
> 
> Yes the patches 3-8 is the response to Michael Walles observations on LAN966x
> and Jakubs Kicinski comment (see link), but the description in the commits may
> not be that clear, in the sense that they do not state one-to-one what the
> mitigation is.
> 
> See https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20221209150332.79a921fd@kernel.org/
> 
> So essentially this makes it possible to have rules that are always in the VCAP
> HW (to make the PTP feature work), even before the TC chains have been
> established (which was the problem that Michael encountered).
> 
> I still think this a net submission, since it fixes the problem that was
> observed in the previous netnext window.
> 
> But I will rephrase the reasoning in a V2 to hopefully make that more
> understandable.
> 
> If you still think it is better to post this in the upcoming net-next window, I
> am also OK with that.

IMHO this series is quite too invasive for net, especially considering
it will possibly land into the Linus tree with a timeframe promising a
large latency in response to any problem.

If there is any kind of available workaround to address the issue
(comprising disabling h/w offload) I *think* net-next would be a better
option.

Cheers,

Paolo