All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, geirola@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] SCTP updates
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 11:57:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53BD1211.4080504@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140708144127.GB23026@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>

On 07/08/2014 04:41 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 04:05:26PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 07/08/2014 01:14 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
>> ...
>>> since you're adding cmsg's from rfc6458, do you also want to add some
>>> deprecation warnings around the use of SCTP_SNDRCVINFO too, so we can start to
>>> schedule its eventual removal?
>>
>> Sure, we can do that. Do you want me to include it into the set?
>
> If you're plan is to implement 6458, then yes, I think that would be good.

Looking a bit closer at it, all our pr_warn_ratelimited(DEPRECATED ...)
warnings in SCTP are being done in 'slowpath' {set,get}sockopt(2) operations
only, which is fine. What you're suggesting is to place similar ratelimited
warnings (due to different possible pids on the machine) into the 'fastpath'
where we get and set cmsg message headers.

While that may be fine for {set,get}sockopt(2) that's called once or very few
times, I'm not sure this is a good idea in SCTP_SNDRCVINFO as it will yield
to unnecessary spamming the klog since up to now this is the only way our
users can set or receive this info. I'm not sure we want to annoy users like
that ...

In how many years do you plan a removal ... I think we're stuck with uapi
basically forever as we don't want to break old binaries, no? ;/

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, geirola@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] SCTP updates
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 09:57:37 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53BD1211.4080504@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140708144127.GB23026@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>

On 07/08/2014 04:41 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 04:05:26PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 07/08/2014 01:14 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
>> ...
>>> since you're adding cmsg's from rfc6458, do you also want to add some
>>> deprecation warnings around the use of SCTP_SNDRCVINFO too, so we can start to
>>> schedule its eventual removal?
>>
>> Sure, we can do that. Do you want me to include it into the set?
>
> If you're plan is to implement 6458, then yes, I think that would be good.

Looking a bit closer at it, all our pr_warn_ratelimited(DEPRECATED ...)
warnings in SCTP are being done in 'slowpath' {set,get}sockopt(2) operations
only, which is fine. What you're suggesting is to place similar ratelimited
warnings (due to different possible pids on the machine) into the 'fastpath'
where we get and set cmsg message headers.

While that may be fine for {set,get}sockopt(2) that's called once or very few
times, I'm not sure this is a good idea in SCTP_SNDRCVINFO as it will yield
to unnecessary spamming the klog since up to now this is the only way our
users can set or receive this info. I'm not sure we want to annoy users like
that ...

In how many years do you plan a removal ... I think we're stuck with uapi
basically forever as we don't want to break old binaries, no? ;/

  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-09  9:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-04 21:05 [PATCH net-next 0/5] SCTP updates Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-04 21:05 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-04 21:05 ` [PATCH net-next 1/5] net: sctp: fix information leaks in ulpevent layer Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-04 21:05   ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-04 21:05 ` [PATCH net-next 5/5] net: sctp: implement rfc6458, 8.1.31. SCTP_DEFAULT_SNDINFO support Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-04 21:05   ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-08 11:14 ` [PATCH net-next 0/5] SCTP updates Neil Horman
2014-07-08 11:14   ` Neil Horman
2014-07-08 14:05   ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-08 14:05     ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-08 14:41     ` Neil Horman
2014-07-08 14:41       ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09  9:57       ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
2014-07-09  9:57         ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-09 10:49         ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09 10:49           ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09 11:12           ` David Laight
2014-07-09 11:12             ` David Laight
2014-07-09 13:28           ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-09 13:28             ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-09 15:13             ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09 15:13               ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09 15:25               ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-09 15:25                 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-09 15:41                 ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09 15:41                   ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09 15:36               ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-09 15:36                 ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-09 15:44                 ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09 15:44                   ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09 16:02                   ` David Laight
2014-07-09 16:02                     ` David Laight
2014-07-09 16:12                     ` Michael Tuexen
2014-07-09 16:12                       ` Michael Tuexen
2014-07-09 16:30                       ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-09 16:30                         ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-09 16:32                   ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-09 16:32                     ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-09 18:35                     ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09 18:35                       ` Neil Horman
2014-07-10  9:02                       ` David Laight
2014-07-10  9:37                         ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-10  9:37                           ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-10 10:57                           ` Neil Horman
2014-07-10 10:57                             ` Neil Horman
2014-07-10 19:04                           ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-10 19:04                             ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-07-10 10:55                         ` Neil Horman
2014-07-10 10:55                           ` Neil Horman
2014-07-09 16:10                 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-09 16:10                   ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-08 21:40 ` David Miller
2014-07-08 21:40   ` David Miller
2014-07-09  7:59   ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-07-09  7:59     ` Daniel Borkmann
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-12-20  1:47 [PATCH net-next 0/5]: " Vlad Yasevich
2008-12-20  1:47 ` Vlad Yasevich
2008-12-20  1:47 ` Vlad Yasevich
2008-12-20  1:47   ` Vlad Yasevich

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=53BD1211.4080504@redhat.com \
    --to=dborkman@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=geirola@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.