netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/7] Add bpf programmable net device

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: <ZTn6ivygoE937Vk0@nanopsycho>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:35:06 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, razor@...ckwall.org, ast@...nel.org,
	andrii@...nel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com, sdf@...gle.com,
	toke@...nel.org, kuba@...nel.org, andrew@...n.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/7] Add bpf programmable net device

Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 06:54:27PM CEST, martin.lau@...ux.dev wrote:
>On 10/25/23 8:50 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 01:50:25AM CEST, patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@...nel.org wrote:
>> > Hello:
>> > 
>> > This series was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
>> > by Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...nel.org>:
>> 
>> Interesting, applied within 2 hours after send. You bpf people don't
>> care about some 24h timeout?
>
>24hr? The v1 was posted to both netdev and bpf list on 9/25. It was 10/24
>yesterday. The part you commented in patch 1 had not been changed much since
>v1, so there was a month of time. netdev is always on the cc list. Multiple
>people (Andrew, Jakub...etc) had already helped to review and Daniel had
>addressed the comments. The change history had been diminishing from v1 to v4
>and v4 changes was mostly nit-picking already.

AFAIK netdev maintainer have a policy (which I thoink I saw written
down somewhere but cannot find) that the patch stays on the list one day
before it is getting applied. It actually makes a lot of sense. Anyway,
I may be wrong.

>