From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217E6C43461 for ; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 11:45:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA33D2067C for ; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 11:45:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729108AbgIGLpk (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Sep 2020 07:45:40 -0400 Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([62.96.220.36]:38180 "EHLO a.mx.secunet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728973AbgIGLYV (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Sep 2020 07:24:21 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01FBD2019C; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 13:24:13 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (a.mx.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CLT690AUOpRN; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 13:24:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from cas-essen-01.secunet.de (201.40.53.10.in-addr.arpa [10.53.40.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AE202008D; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 13:24:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mbx-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.197) by cas-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1979.3; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 13:24:12 +0200 Received: from gauss2.secunet.de (10.182.7.193) by mbx-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.197) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2044.4; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 13:24:12 +0200 Received: by gauss2.secunet.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E2400318450A; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 13:24:11 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 13:24:11 +0200 From: Steffen Klassert To: Dmitry Safonov CC: , Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@gmail.com>, "David S. Miller" , Florian Westphal , Herbert Xu , Jakub Kicinski , Stephen Suryaputra , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] xfrm/compat: Add 64=>32-bit messages translator Message-ID: <20200907112411.GK20687@gauss3.secunet.de> References: <20200826014949.644441-1-dima@arista.com> <20200826014949.644441-2-dima@arista.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200826014949.644441-2-dima@arista.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-ClientProxiedBy: cas-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.201) To mbx-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.197) X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: 2c86f778-e09b-4440-8b15-867914633a10 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 02:49:44AM +0100, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > XFRM is disabled for compatible users because of the UABI difference. > The difference is in structures paddings and in the result the size > of netlink messages differ. > > Possibility for compatible application to manage xfrm tunnels was > disabled by: the commmit 19d7df69fdb2 ("xfrm: Refuse to insert 32 bit > userspace socket policies on 64 bit systems") and the commit 74005991b78a > ("xfrm: Do not parse 32bits compiled xfrm netlink msg on 64bits host"). > > This is my second attempt to resolve the xfrm/compat problem by adding > the 64=>32 and 32=>64 bit translators those non-visibly to a user > provide translation between compatible user and kernel. > Previous attempt was to interrupt the message ABI according to a syscall > by xfrm_user, which resulted in over-complicated code [1]. > > Florian Westphal provided the idea of translator and some draft patches > in the discussion. In these patches, his idea is reused and some of his > initial code is also present. One comment on this. Looks like the above is the same in all commit messages. Please provide that generic information with the patch 0/n and remove it from the other patches.