MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230307172306.786657-1-kal.conley@dectris.com>
 <20230308105130.1113833-1-kal.conley@dectris.com> <4ddd3fe4-ed3c-495e-077c-1ac737488084@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <4ddd3fe4-ed3c-495e-077c-1ac737488084@intel.com>
From:   Kal Cutter Conley <kal.conley@dectris.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Mar 2023 19:49:29 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHApi-=C3ym23bBQ2h8BOyOfUtYXs9eZNG0Z8G2zfPeaEQWeRg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xsk: Add missing overflow check in xdp_umem_reg
To:     Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>
Cc:     =?UTF-8?B?QmrDtnJuIFTDtnBlbA==?= <bjorn@kernel.org>,
        Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@intel.com>,
        Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>,
        Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@gmail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

> The code is fine to me.
> Please resubmit with the fixed subject and expanded commit message.
> I'd also prefer that you sent v3 as a separate mail, *not* as a reply to
> this thread.

Done. I used "bpf" in the subject as you suggested, however I am a bit
confused by this. Should changes under net/xdp generally use "bpf" in
the subject?

Thanks,
Kal