[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <28ca6b01-248c-43f6-b20f-79ff39f03974@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 10:58:58 +0100
From: Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@...nel.org>
To: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
Cc: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuni1840@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
mptcp@...ts.linux.dev, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
Gerd Bayer <gbayer@...ux.ibm.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Mat Martineau <martineau@...nel.org>,
Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>, Jan Karcher <jaka@...ux.ibm.com>,
Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>, Tony Lu <tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com>,
"D . Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] net: Deprecate SO_DEBUG and reclaim SOCK_DBG
bit.
Hi Kuniyuki,
On 14/02/2024 20:54, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> Recently, commit 8e5443d2b866 ("net: remove SOCK_DEBUG leftovers")
> removed the last users of SOCK_DEBUG(), and commit b1dffcf0da22 ("net:
> remove SOCK_DEBUG macro") removed the macro.
>
> Now is the time to deprecate the oldest socket option.
>
> Note that setsockopt(SO_DEBUG) is moved not to acquire lock_sock().
>
> Reviewed-by: Gerd Bayer <gbayer@...ux.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
> ---
> v2:
> * Move setsockopt(SO_DEBUG) code not to acquire lock_sock().
Thank you for the v2!
Good idea to have modified that in net/core/sock.c too!
Reviewed-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matttbe@...nel.org>
I don't think we need to do anything else, but just to be sure: do we
need to tell the userspace this socket option has been deprecated?
SO_DEBUG is a bit particular, so I guess it is fine not to do anything
else, but except by looking at the kernel version, I don't think the
userspace can know it has no more effect.
I didn't find many examples of other deprecated socket options, apart
from SO_BSDCOMPAT. For years, there was a warning, removed a few years
ago: f4ecc748533d ("net: Stop warning about SO_BSDCOMPAT usage"). I
guess we don't want that for SO_DEBUG, right?
Cheers,
Matt
--
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists