netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH 00/15] eth: fbnic: Add network driver for Meta Platforms Host Network Interface

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: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 14:49:27 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
 Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
 Alexander Duyck <alexanderduyck@...com>, davem@...emloft.net,
 pabeni@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 00/15] eth: fbnic: Add network driver for Meta
 Platforms Host Network Interface

On 4/8/24 13:43, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>>
>>> Also as far as item 3 isn't hard for it to be a "user-visible"
>>> regression if there are no users outside of the vendor that is
>>> maintaining the driver to report it?
>>
>> This wasn't the case. It was change in core code, which broke specific
>> version of vagrant. Vendor caught it simply by luck.
> 
> Any more info on this? Without context it is hard to say one way or the other.

Believe this is the thread in question:

https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/MN2PR12MB44863139E562A59329E89DBEB982A@MN2PR12MB4486.namprd12.prod.outlook.com/
-- 
Florian