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;
Message-ID: <5c899a02-cec1-07c9-1c1a-8747773ece0c@arista.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Nov 2022 20:56:18 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.5.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] net/tcp: Disable TCP-MD5 static key on
 tcp_md5sig_info destruction
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        Bob Gilligan <gilligan@arista.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@gmail.com>,
        Francesco Ruggeri <fruggeri@arista.com>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Salam Noureddine <noureddine@arista.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
References: <20221115211905.1685426-1-dima@arista.com>
 <20221115211905.1685426-4-dima@arista.com>
 <20221118191809.0174f4da@kernel.org>
 <31efe48a-4c68-f17c-64ee-88d45f56c438@arista.com>
 <20221121124135.4015cc66@kernel.org>
From:   Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com>
In-Reply-To: <20221121124135.4015cc66@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 11/21/22 20:41, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 20:31:38 +0000 Dmitry Safonov wrote:
>>> Maybe it wouldn't be 
>>> the worst move to provide a sk_rcu_dereference() or rcu_dereference_sk()
>>> or some such wrapper.
>>>
>>> More importantly tho - was the merging part for this patches discussed?
>>> They don't apply to net-next.  
>>
>> They apply over linux-next as there's a change [1] in
>> linux-tip/locking/core on which the patches set based.
>>
>> Could the way forward be through linux-tip tree, or that might create
>> net conflicts?
> 
> Dunno from memory, too much happens in these files :S
> 
> Could you cherry-pick [1] onto net-next and see if 
> 
>   git am --no-3way patches/*
> 
> goes thru cleanly? If so no objections for the patches to go via tip,
> we're close enough to the merge window.

That did go cleanly for me on today's net-next/main.

>> I'll send v5 with the trivial change to rcu_dereference_protected()
>> mentioned above.

Thanks,
          Dmitry