netdev - Re: pull-request: bpf-next 2024-04-29

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240430064508.13fa79a3@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 06:45:08 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...il.com>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, davem@...emloft.net,
 pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, ast@...nel.org, andrii@...nel.org,
 martin.lau@...ux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pull-request: bpf-next 2024-04-29

On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 10:16:33 +0200 Magnus Karlsson wrote:
> > Could you follow up to remove this header?
> > Having to keep multiple headers in sync is annoying, and using
> > 'make headers' or including in-tree headers directly is not rocket
> > science.  
> 
> Just because I am curious, what was the reason/history behind the
> tools/include directory to start with? Most headers seem to be copies
> there.

I think it started as folks copying a handful of headers for perf tool
and snowballed from there. By the time I pulled this the copy of
ethtool.h was already out of date. So is if_xdp.h, BTW, as I am
reminded every time I built networking selftests.