From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: pull request (net-next): ipsec-next 2013-02-14 Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:30:45 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20130214.133045.921192511470923993.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1360842447-3344-1-git-send-email-steffen.klassert@secunet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: steffen.klassert@secunet.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:58779 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760806Ab3BNSar (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:30:47 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1360842447-3344-1-git-send-email-steffen.klassert@secunet.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Steffen Klassert Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:47:20 +0100 > 1) Remove a duplicated call to skb_orphan() in pf_key, from Cong Wang. > > 2) Prepare xfrm and pf_key for algorithms without pf_key support, > from Jussi Kivilinna. > > 3) Fix an unbalanced lock in xfrm_output_one(), from Li RongQing. > > 4) Add an IPsec state resolution packet queue to handle > packets that are send before the states are resolved. > > 5) xfrm4_policy_fini() is unused since 2.6.11, time to remove it. > From Michal Kubecek. > > 6) The xfrm gc threshold was configurable just in the initial > namespace, make it configurable in all namespaces. From > Michal Kubecek. > > 7) We currently can not insert policies with mark and mask > such that some flows would be matched from both policies. > Allow this if the priorities of these policies are different, > the one with the higher priority is used in this case. > > Please pull or let me know if there are problems. Pulled, thanks Steffen.