Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1461889 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-08-14 13:20 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-08-14 20:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 4 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 3.16 289/305] netfilter: x_tables: validate targets of jumps Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> - 2016-08-14 13:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 3.16 289/305] netfilter: x_tables: validate targets of jumps Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> - 2016-08-14 15:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 3.16 289/305] netfilter: x_tables: validate targets of jumps Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> - 2016-08-17 02:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 3.16 289/305] netfilter: x_tables: validate targets of jumps Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> - 2016-08-14 20:10 +0200
| From | Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-14 13:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 3.16 289/305] netfilter: x_tables: validate targets of jumps |
| Message-ID | <s61Cq-7hw-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > 3.16.37-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > ------------------ > > From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> > > commit 36472341017529e2b12573093cc0f68719300997 upstream. [..] > The extra overhead is negible, even with absurd cases. Not true, the overhead is huge and increases restore time for large rulesets from mere seconds to minutes, see https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f4dc77713f8016d2e8a3295e1c9c53a21f296def
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-14 15:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s63uy-83-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1461889 |
Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > On Sat, 2016-08-13 at 20:30 +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > > > Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > > > > > > 3.16.37-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > > > ------------------ > > > > > > > > From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> > > > > > > commit 36472341017529e2b12573093cc0f68719300997 upstream. > > > > [..] > > > > > > > > The extra overhead is negible, even with absurd cases. > > > > Not true, the overhead is huge and increases restore time for > > large rulesets from mere seconds to minutes, see > > > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f4dc77713f8016d2e8a3295e1c9c53a21f296def > > So do you think I should add that to this update or defer the netfilter > changes to the next update? Depends on what your focus is for 3.16. If your focus is to better not break anything I would just drop this patch and apply it for the next round with the fix (f4dc77713f8016d2e8a3295e1c9c53a21f296def) on top once it had more soak time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-17 02:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s6WU2-1Ld-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1462123 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Sat, 2016-08-13 at 22:35 +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > > Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2016-08-13 at 20:30 +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > > 3.16.37-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > > > > > ------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> > > > > > > > > commit 36472341017529e2b12573093cc0f68719300997 upstream. > > > > > > [..] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The extra overhead is negible, even with absurd cases. > > > > > > Not true, the overhead is huge and increases restore time for > > > large rulesets from mere seconds to minutes, see > > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f4dc77713f8016d2e8a3295e1c9c53a21f296def > > > > So do you think I should add that to this update or defer the netfilter > > changes to the next update? > > Depends on what your focus is for 3.16. > > If your focus is to better not break anything I would just drop > this patch and apply it for the next round with the fix > (f4dc77713f8016d2e8a3295e1c9c53a21f296def) on top once it had more > soak time. I thought there were more that depended on this one, but in fact dropping just this seems to work. So that's what I've done for now. Thanks. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings If at first you don't succeed, you're doing about average.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-14 20:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s63uy-83-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1461889 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Sat, 2016-08-13 at 20:30 +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > > Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > > > > 3.16.37-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > ------------------ > > > > > > From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> > > > > commit 36472341017529e2b12573093cc0f68719300997 upstream. > > [..] > > > > > The extra overhead is negible, even with absurd cases. > > Not true, the overhead is huge and increases restore time for > large rulesets from mere seconds to minutes, see > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f4dc77713f8016d2e8a3295e1c9c53a21f296def So do you think I should add that to this update or defer the netfilter changes to the next update? Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. - Albert Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web