Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

[Daniel Borkmann]

On 05/22/2013 09:19 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 00:14:58 -0700
>
> > On Wed, 22 May 2013 00:07:48 -0700 (PDT) David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:04:38 -0700
> > >
> > > > Nicolas, I think the patches need a re-check so I'll drop the versions
> > > > which I presently have.  Please refresh, retest and resend when
> > > > convenient?  It'll need to be against linux-next, which is where the
> > > > conflicting (vfree/module_free) changes have occurred.
> > >
> > > How about working against net-next and submitting your patches to netdev
> > > just like the rest of the world?
> >
> > Well that's probably practical.  But the patchset is a seccomp
> > enhancement for (at present) ARM.  Not exactly net stuff, or anything
> > which netdev readers are likely to spend a lot of time testing and
> > reviewing.
>
> The seccomp BPF bits we reviewed and were interested in completely, because
> we're going to have to support JIT'ing all of that stuff on every cpu and
> we're interested how it fits into the existing BPF codes and infrastructure.

+1

seccomp is wired with BPF (JITs in arch/*/net/ + net/core/filter.c) and that's
part of networking, so they should go through netdev. This makes it also way
easier for review.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/