From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:33556 "EHLO
        shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753394AbeBSRPl (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:15:41 -0500
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:15:37 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20180219.121537.1539564190955393526.davem@davemloft.net>
To: phil@nwl.cc
Cc: laforge@gnumonks.org, fw@strlen.de, daniel@iogearbox.net,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/4] net: add bpfilter
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <20180219170939.GF15918@orbyte.nwl.cc>
References: <20180219152746.GH5490@nataraja>
        <20180219.103139.2230101523652161323.davem@davemloft.net>
        <20180219170939.GF15918@orbyte.nwl.cc>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

From: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 18:09:39 +0100

> What puzzles me about your argumentation is that you seem to propose for
> the kernel to cover up flaws in userspace. Spinning this concept further
> would mean that if there would be an old bug in iproute2 we should think
> of adding a workaround to rtnetlink interface in kernel because
> containers will keep the old iproute2 binary? Or am I (hopefully) just
> missing your point?

I'll answer this with a question.  I tried to remove UFO entirely from
the kernel, did you see how that went?