On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 12:59 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/1/2024 9:42 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 12:35 PM Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 12:14 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> On 11/1/2024 12:25 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > >>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 04:58:13PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote: > >>>>> On 10/31/2024 4:23 PM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > >>>>>> On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 12:15:16AM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > >>>>>>> Hi Paul, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This patch breaks nf_conntrack_netlink, Casey mentioned that he will > >>>>>>> post another series. > >>>>> I have a fix, it is pretty simple. How about I send a 6/5 patch for it? > >>>> No idea. I don't know what is the status of this series. I would > >>>> suggest to repost a new series. > >>> I will post v4 shortly. Thanks for the feedback. > >> Please just post a fix against v2 using lsm/dev as a base. > > That should have been "against *v3* using lsm/dev as a base". > > > > Also, since I didn't explicitly mention it, if I don't see a fix by > > dinner time tonight (US East Coast), I'll revert this patchset, but > > I'd like to avoid that if possible. > > I will have this as quickly as I can. The patch is easy, but the overhead > may slow it down a bit. I should have it in time to avoid the revert. It turns out there is no rush on this as it looks like the Rust bindings are going to be the one that ends up pushing this out past the next merge window as there is a conflict with changes to the Rust LSM helpers in the VFS tree. We still obviously need to the fix, so please keep going with the fix based against v3; I'm going to move the v3 patchset from lsm/dev to lsm/dev-staging, this will still allow for the usual LSM testing but will shield it from linux-next. -- paul-moore.com
