netdev - Re: [PATCH RESEND] io_uring/af_unix: disable sending io

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: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 21:45:38 -0700
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>,
 patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@...nel.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
 jannh@...gle.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] io_uring/af_unix: disable sending io_uring over sockets

On Dec 11, 2023, at 7:39 PM, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 01:18:00 +0000 Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>> Here is the summary with links:
>>>   - [RESEND] io_uring/af_unix: disable sending io_uring over sockets
>>>     https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net/c/69db702c8387  
>> 
>> It has already been taken by Jens into the io_uring tree, and a pr
>> with it was merged by Linus. I think it should be dropped from
>> the net tree?
> 
> Ugh, I think if I revert it now it can only hurt.
> Git will figure out that the change is identical, and won't complain
> at the merge (unless we change it again on top, IIUC).

Yeah, git will handle it just fine, it’ll just be an empty duplicate. Annoying, but not the end of the world. 

> If I may, however, in the most polite way possible put forward
> the suggestion to send a notification to the list when patch is
> applied, it helps avoid such confusion... I do hate most automated
> emails myself, but an "applied" notification is good.

I did do that, I always do. But looks like b4 replies to the first email rather than the one that had netdev cc’ed, which may be why this happened in the first place. 

— 
Jens Axboe