From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] tcp: bugs and cleanup for 2.6.34-rc1 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:01:04 +0100 Message-ID: <1268319664.2986.535.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <4B98D592.6040301@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Developers , Linux Kernel Network Developers , David Miller To: William Allen Simpson Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4B98D592.6040301@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Le jeudi 11 mars 2010 =C3=A0 06:35 -0500, William Allen Simpson a =C3=A9= crit : > I'd have thought that there would be greater interest about patching > crashing bugs, signed versus unsigned (underflow) bugs, TCP DoS bugs, > TCP data corruption, and TCP performance problems.... >=20 > There's been ample warning. Zero-day security issues will be reporte= d > to the usual announcement lists. In particular, these 0day exploits > affect systems as far back as the 2005 changeover to git. >=20 > Combination of patches reported in October, November, December, Janua= ry, > and February, for 2.6.32, 2.6.33, and now 2.6.34. >=20 > This code has had previous review and several months of limited testi= ng. >=20 > Some portions were removed during the various TCPCT part 1 patch spli= ts, > then were cut off by the sudden unexpected end of that merge window. > [03 Dec 2009] I've restarted the sub-numbering (again). >=20 > Of particular interest are the TCPCT header extensions that already > appear in the next phase of testing with other platforms. These patc= hes > allow correct reception without data corruption. >=20 > The remainder of the original TCPCT part 2 will be merged with part 3= =2E >=20 > [Updated to 2010 Mar 08 2.6.34-rc1.] > -- Mr William Allen Simpson It would be nice if you could update your knowledge of how linux development works these days. Please spend few hours for that, it will save us lot of time. Our time is valuable as much as yours, I doubt we'll change our habits to fit your wills. You throw too many changes at once to let them being reviewed, understood, and accepted. =46or your information, we had to correct a fatal bug introduced by you= r last commits, and as far as I know, you didnt help that much. http://git2.kernel.org/?p=3Dlinux/kernel/git/davem/net-2.6.git;a=3Dcomm= it;h=3D28b2774a0d5852236dab77a4147b8b88548110f1 We are post linux-2.6.34-rc1, so only bug fixes are wanted by Linus and David, to be integrated in 2.6.34 (and previous versions if needed) We are _not_ interested by new stuff at *this* moment, especially if it takes lot of time to review. New network stuff (for 2.6.35 or 2.6.36) should be validated once net-next-2.6 re-opens (in about one week I suppose, David will send a mail to netdev to let us/you know the exact moment). So please split your patches again and submit only bug fixes to netdev. Once accepted by community and maintainer, David will push them upstream. Then, in about 10 days, please submit new stuff that hopefully find their way if you accept our reviews and comments. Last time I made some comments on your patches, you just ignored them o= r loaned, because obviously who is Eric Dumazet to tell William Allen Simpson how things should be done ? Silly me ! I remember this fairly well, this is why I ignored your last submission= s (and privately explained to you why I did this). Speaking for myself, but as your previous mails were ignored, I felt it was time to clarify the points.