netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] net: Split a __sys_bind helper for io

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: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 08:04:47 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...e.de>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] net: Split a __sys_bind helper for io_uring

On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 07:40:40 -0600 Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 6/18/24 6:49 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Jun 2024 12:30:44 -0400 Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:  
> >> io_uring holds a reference to the file and maintains a
> >> sockaddr_storage address.  Similarly to what was done to
> >> __sys_connect_file, split an internal helper for __sys_bind in
> >> preparation to supporting an io_uring bind command.
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
> >> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...e.de>  
> > 
> > Acked-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>  
> 
> Are you fine with me queueing up 1-2 via the io_uring branch?
> I'm guessing the risk of conflict should be very low, so doesn't
> warrant a shared branch.

Yup, exactly, these can go via io_uring without branch juggling.