netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 03/14] ipv6: prepare inet6_fill

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]

Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 08:16:56 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 03/14] ipv6: prepare inet6_fill_ifinfo() for
 RCU protection

Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 05:45:20PM CET, edumazet@...gle.com wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 5:36 PM Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>>
>> Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 11:50:10AM CET, edumazet@...gle.com wrote:
>> >We want to use RCU protection instead of RTNL
>>
>> Is this a royal "We"? :)
>
>I was hoping reducing RTNL pressure was a team effort.

Yeah sure, it just reads odd to me, that's it. Basically if you state
the motivation in the cover letter, then in the patches you just tell
the codebase what to do and this "we want" statement become redundant.


>
>If not, maybe I should consider doing something else, if hundreds of
>kernel engineers are adding more and more stuff depending on RTNL.