netdev - Re: [ANN] netdev call

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]

Message-ID: <b2ce5d8f-139b-4460-bc01-1d6e348ec31a@linux.dev>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 11:39:04 -0400
From: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
Cc: netdev-driver-reviewers@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
 Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [ANN] netdev call - Aug 12th

On 8/12/25 11:29, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 16:16:53 +0100 Daniel Golle wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 07:55:10AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> > The bi-weekly call is scheduled for tomorrow at 8:30 am (PT) / 
>> > 5:30 pm (~EU), at https://bbb.lwn.net/rooms/ldm-chf-zxx-we7/join
>> > 
>> > Sorry for the late announcement, I got out of the habit of sending
>> > these. Luckily Daniel pinged.
>> > 
>> > Daniel do you think it still makes sense to talk about the PCS driver,
>> > or did folks assume the that call is not happning?  
>> 
>> It could make sense to talk about it, but maybe we talk about other
>> topics first to Sean can join us as well. However, I think mostly we
>> depend on Russell or someone else to make a decision in terms of how the
>> three of us (Christian, Sean and I) should continue.
> 
> Well, then I'm not sure if a meeting is the right approach in the first
> place. Perhaps it's just my feeling but in corporate world managers call
> meetings to force a decision (conclave-style). Upstream we force
> decisions by having patches ready to be merged on the list.
> 
> I would like to avoid anyone ever feeling obligated to join a meeting
> as part of their upstream work.

Personally, I am willing to swap things around as necessary, but I haven't
gotten that impression from Daniel/Christian. I have provided feedback on
Christian's series, but I haven't gotten the follow-up discussion I was
looking for. I think there may be a perception that Russell needs to make
a decision, but I think it would be better for us to come to an agreement
about the best architecture.

I think at this point I (and hopefully Daniel/Christian) have a good idea
of the strengths/limitations of our proposed implementations. I would like
to meet and discuss the best path forward in terms of how we want to solve
the problems. I would also appreciate input from the netdev maintainers who
may have broader experience and perspectives (and who are likely to spend
the most time interacting with whatever solution we come up with).

--Sean