netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: dsa: sync dsa_mall_policer_tc_entry with FLOW_ACTION

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: <CAAXyoMOiLBcS3E8kRFGpxPzhXEtq+BhZRkQNbvcNiG96+LRQqw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 09:40:02 +0800
From: David Yang <mmyangfl@...il.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: dsa: sync dsa_mall_policer_tc_entry with FLOW_ACTION_POLICE

On Mon, Feb 2, 2026 at 6:52 PM Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2026 at 12:58:16PM +0800, David Yang wrote:
> > diff --git a/net/dsa/user.c b/net/dsa/user.c
> > index f59d66f0975d..2a209b83c701 100644
> > --- a/net/dsa/user.c
> > +++ b/net/dsa/user.c
> > @@ -1497,8 +1497,19 @@ dsa_user_add_cls_matchall_police(struct net_device *dev,
> >       mall_tc_entry->cookie = cls->cookie;
> >       mall_tc_entry->type = DSA_PORT_MALL_POLICER;
> >       policer = &mall_tc_entry->policer;
> > +     /* until they export the type of act->police in flow_offload.h ... */
>
> There is no "us" and "them", it's a single git tree. Just submit a patch
> to whomever ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl says to.
>
> Have you tried something like the patch attached (just compile-tested)?

Yes, but I was afraid it would be kind of inconsistent not exposing
other struct flow_action_*. Nicer and better approach, though.