13 Mar
2017
13 Mar
'17
9:06 p.m.
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo(a)netfilter.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:48:12 +0100
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 05:42:55PM +0100, Andreas
Schultz wrote:
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.
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(a)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.