netdev - Re: [PATCH net 1/4] tcp: add tcp_done_with

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: Tue, 28 May 2024 13:50:44 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>, "David S . Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org,  eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/4] tcp: add tcp_done_with_error() helper

On Tue, 2024-05-28 at 13:31 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 12:41 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Waiting for Neal's ack.
> > 
> > FTR I think the new helper introduction is worthy even just for the
> > consistency it brings.
> > 
> > IIRC there is some extra complexity in the MPTCP code to handle
> > correctly receiving the sk_error_report sk_state_change cb pair in both
> > possible orders.
> 
> Would you prefer me to base the series on net-next then ?

Now that you make me thing about it, net-next will be preferable to
handle possible mptcp follow-up (if any). And the addressed issue
itself are so old it should not make difference in practice, right?

So if it's not a problem for you move the patches on a different tree,
net-next would be good option, thanks!

Paolo