[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9e6e933d-be9b-406b-85f4-7b8e3c2f8267@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 08:08:34 +0000
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ethtool: avoid rebuilds on UTS_RELEASE change
On 21/02/2024 19:35, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
Thanks for including me
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 20:25:00 +0100 Jann Horn wrote:
>>> Is this related to John's work from:
>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240131104851.2311358-1-john.g.garry@oracle.com/__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!IghWg9_5HEQ-ng1XiYH9hes6vmgylmcQF5l2RITIrCSB20BzKzOhWWKHrgQZw_DkgKlZRNllglTanuY$
>>> ?
>>
>> Ah, I didn't see his patch, but that seems like he had the same idea
>> (but implemented it less sloppily). You can drop this one then...
>
> No preference on my side, just wanted to make sure we don't have
> to decide within netdev which approach is better, not really our
> wheelhouse :)
I was not going to pursue the change to introduce uts_release, as we can
instead use init_uts_ns.name.release or init_utsname()->release instead.
I think that init_utsname()->release is a bit neater to use, as it
slightly hides the init_uts_ns structure.
@Jann, please feel free to pursue upstreaming the change in this patch with:
Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
However, note that I do have many other changes pending on this subject,
see:
https://github.com/johnpgarry/linux/commits/uts-version-string/
I just need to find a bit of time to update and post them. We also need
to be wary of CONFIG_MODVERSIONS, as discussed in that thread.
Thanks,
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists