On 9/28/26 12:31, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 11:26:47PM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote: >> On 9/24/26 12:17, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 03:18:13PM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote: >>>> ... >>>> I've addressed all your other comments for v2 and went through Ashiko's >>>> reports (side effects of lockless peer_shutdown write, imperfect >>>> no-transport TCP_LISTENER enforcement). I've decided to try the >>>> eager-unassign approach. I think/hope this way we sidestep the lockless >>>> writes and enforce the invariant without breaking the API, while fixing the >>>> bugs. >>>> >>>> This should probably be RFC, but I'm posting as v3[1] so netdev's LLM can >>>> have a go (too). Hope I'm not breaking any workflow. Let me know what you >>>> think. >>> >>> I think you can add RFC also on a v3 patch, just to make it clear you >>> are not sure it's ready to be merged. >>> >>> That said, thanks for that :-) I'll take a look today or next week >>> because I'm off tomorrow. >>> >>> I'm just worried it's becoming too big for net. Anyway, I'll comment >>> there. >> >> Yeah, I get it. Would you rather have a single net.git patch[1] for the >> original report + keep all the rest for net-next, or do the whole series as >> is, but slowly at net-next? > > I'd go with the first option. Let's try to get the fix into net first, > and then move the rest to net-next at a reasonable pace. WDYT?
Sure, there it is: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/[email protected]/ thanks, Michal
