This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/osmocom-net-gprs@lists.osmocom.org/.
David Miller davem at davemloft.netFrom: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo at netfilter.org> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:48:12 +0100 > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 05:42:55PM +0100, Andreas Schultz wrote: >> Hi Pablo, >> >> This is a resent of last series that missed the merge window. There >> are no changes compared to v4. >> >> v4: Compared to v3 it contains mostly smallish naming and spelling fixes. >> It also drops the documentation patch, Harald did a better job with the >> documentation and the some things I described do not yet match the implementation. >> I'll readd the relevant parts with a follow up series. >> >> This series lays the groundwork for removing the socket references from >> the GTP netdevice by removing duplicate code and simplifying the logic on >> some code paths. >> >> It slighly changes the GTP genl API by making the socket parameters optional >> (though one of them is still required). >> >> The removal of the socket references will break the 1:1 releation between >> GTP netdevice and GTP socket that prevents us to support multiple VRFs with >> overlapping IP addresse spaces attached to the same GTP-U entity (needed for >> multi APN support, coming a follow up series). >> >> Pablo found a socket hold problem in v2. In order to solve that I had to >> switch the socket references from the struct socket to the internal >> struct sock. This should have no functionl impact, but we can now hang >> on to the reference without blocking user space from closing the GTP socket. > > Acked-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo at netfilter.org> > > I personally don't like this podge hodge unsorted submissions, I don't > think they belong to the same series but you keep pushing with this > patchset in this same way, which is annoying. > > In your follow up patchsets, please split them in smaller series that > are related. Series applied, and I agree with Pablo. If the best you can come up with for a Subject line in your series header posting is "misc improvements" it absolutely means you are putting unrelated changes together in a series and you need to refine the submission such that only related changes are submitted together. Then you can say "gtp: Adjust GTP socket handling", for example, in your header posting of a 2 patch series that includes only patches #1 and #2. Then you patiently wait for that patch series to be accepted, and then you can move onwards to the other aspects of this series.