Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220803101438.24327-1-pabeni@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220803101438.24327-1-pabeni@redhat.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 3 Aug 2022 16:52:32 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=widn7iZozvVZ37cDPK26BdOegGAX_JxR+v62sCv-5=eZg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Networking for 6.0
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Vlad Buslov <vladbu@nvidia.com>,
        Oz Shlomo <ozsh@nvidia.com>,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Cc:     kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 3:15 AM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git tags/net-next-6.0

Hmm. Another thing I note about this.

It adds a new NF_FLOW_TABLE_PROCFS option, and that one has two problems:

 - it is 'default y'. Why?

 - it has 'depends on PROC_FS' etc, but guess what it does *not*
depend on? NF_FLOW_TABLE itself.

So not only does this new code try to enable itself by default, which
is a no-no. We do "default y" if it's an old feature that got split
out as a config option, or if it's something that everybody *really*
should have, but I don't see that being the case here.

But it also asks the user that question even when the user doesn't
even have NF_FLOW_TABLE at all. Which seems entirely crazy.

Am I missing something? Because it looks *completely* broken.

I've said this before, and I'll say this again: our kernel config is
hard on users as-is, and we really shouldn't make it worse by making
it ask invalid questions or have invalid defaults.

                Linus