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: <2eb99672-d8bb-b9ea-fe97-f8f18208884b@iogearbox.net> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 18:06:04 +0200 From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> To: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, anjali.singhai@...el.com, namrata.limaye@...el.com, deb.chatterjee@...el.com, john.andy.fingerhut@...el.com, dan.daly@...el.com, Vipin.Jain@....com, tom@...anda.io, mleitner@...hat.com, Mahesh.Shirshyad@....com, tomasz.osinski@...el.com, jiri@...nulli.us, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, vladbu@...dia.com, horms@...nel.org, khalidm@...dia.com, toke@...hat.com, mattyk@...dia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 net-next 00/18] Introducing P4TC On 10/17/23 5:57 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 11:54 AM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote: >> On 10/17/23 5:38 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 11:00 AM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote: >>>> On 10/16/23 10:38 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 4:15 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote: >>>> [...] >>>>>> FWIW please do not post another version this week (not that I think >>>>>> that you would do that, but better safe than sorry. Last week the patch >>>>>> bombs pushed the shared infra 24h+ behind the list..) >>>>> >>>>> Not intending to. >>>> >>>> Given bpf & kfuncs, please also Cc bpf@...r.kernel.org on future revisions >>>> as not everyone on bpf list is subscribed to netdev. >>> >>> I thought i did that, maybe it was in earlier patches. Do you want Cc >>> on everything or only on kfuncs? I am getting conflicting messages, do >>> you have to Cc bpf for kfuncs? >>> Example, attached from (some fs?) conference last month i think >> >> This is extending capabilities of XDP and tc BPF prog types, so yes, the bpf >> list should be in the loop. > > Roger that, makes sense. So all patches or only kfunc ones? Preferably the whole series as it's a bit hard to see some end to end example on how it would be used if it's largely taken out of context.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists