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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29844ECAAA1 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 23:35:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235321AbiJ0XfK (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2022 19:35:10 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54150 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235164AbiJ0XfK (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2022 19:35:10 -0400 Received: from Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc (Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc [IPv6:2a0a:51c0:0:12e:520::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC9CD22B04; Thu, 27 Oct 2022 16:35:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fw by Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ooCOq-0003mB-QB; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 01:35:01 +0200 Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 01:35:00 +0200 From: Florian Westphal To: Johannes Berg Cc: Jakub Kicinski , Florian Westphal , netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet , "David S. Miller" , Paolo Abeni Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] netlink: introduce NLA_POLICY_MAX_BE Message-ID: <20221027233500.GA1915@breakpoint.cc> References: <20220905100937.11459-1-fw@strlen.de> <20220905100937.11459-2-fw@strlen.de> <20221027133109.590bd74f@kernel.org> <2f528f1a320c55fdc7f3be55095c1f0eacee1032.camel@sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2f528f1a320c55fdc7f3be55095c1f0eacee1032.camel@sipsolutions.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2022-10-27 at 13:31 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 12:09:36 +0200 Florian Westphal wrote: > > > struct { > > > s16 min, max; > > > + u8 network_byte_order:1; > > > }; > > > > This makes the union 64bit even on 32bit systems. > > Do we care? Should we accept that and start using > > full 64bits in other validation members? > > > > We can quite easily steal a bit elsewhere, which > > I reckon may be the right thing to do, but I thought > > I'd ask. I'm fine with scraping the marker elsewhere. > In fact we could easily just have three extra types NLA_BE16, NLA_BE32 > and NLA_BE64 types without even stealing a bit? Sure, I can make a patch if there is consensus that new types are the way to go.