Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-19 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 21:24:53 +0100 Guillaume Nault wrote: > Here's a high level view of: > * the protocol, > * the kernel implementation, > * the context of this RFC, > * and a few pointers at the end :) > > Hope this helps. I've tried to keep it short. Feel free to ask for > clarification

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-18 Thread Guillaume Nault
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 08:47:40AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:28:34 +0100 Guillaume Nault wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:52:37PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 18:16:45 + Tom Parkin wrote: > > > > This small RFC series implements a sug

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-17 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:54:22 + Tom Parkin wrote: > > > I think the question is more about long term maintainance. Do we want > > > to keep PPP related module self contained, with low maintainance code > > > (the current proposal)? Or are we willing to modernise the > > > infrastructure, add sup

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-17 Thread Guillaume Nault
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 12:54:22PM +, Tom Parkin wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 08:47:40 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:28:34 +0100 Guillaume Nault wrote: > > > I think the question is more about long term maintainance. Do we want > > > to keep PPP related module sel

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-17 Thread Tom Parkin
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 08:47:40 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:28:34 +0100 Guillaume Nault wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:52:37PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 18:16:45 + Tom Parkin wrote: > > > > This small RFC series implements a sugg

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-17 Thread Tom Parkin
On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 12:59:59 +0100, Guillaume Nault wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 11:54:07AM +, Tom Parkin wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 23:51:53 +0100, Guillaume Nault wrote: > > > BTW, shouldn't we have an "UNBRIDGE" command to remove the bridge > > > between two channels? > >

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-15 Thread Guillaume Nault
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 11:54:07AM +, Tom Parkin wrote: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 23:51:53 +0100, Guillaume Nault wrote: > > BTW, shouldn't we have an "UNBRIDGE" command to remove the bridge > > between two channels? > > I'm not sure of the usecase for it to be honest. Do you have > somethin

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-10 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:28:34 +0100 Guillaume Nault wrote: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:52:37PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 18:16:45 + Tom Parkin wrote: > > > This small RFC series implements a suggestion from Guillaume Nault in > > > response to my previous submission

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-10 Thread Guillaume Nault
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 12:42:24PM +, Tom Parkin wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 10:28:34 +0100, Guillaume Nault wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:52:37PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 18:16:45 + Tom Parkin wrote: > > > > This small RFC series implements a sug

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-10 Thread Tom Parkin
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 10:28:34 +0100, Guillaume Nault wrote: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:52:37PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 18:16:45 + Tom Parkin wrote: > > > This small RFC series implements a suggestion from Guillaume Nault in > > > response to my previous submis

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-10 Thread Tom Parkin
On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 23:51:53 +0100, Guillaume Nault wrote: > > * I believe that the fact we're not explicitly locking anything in the > >ppp_input path for access to the channel bridge field is OK since: > > > > - ppp_input is called from the socket backlog recv > > > > - ppp

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-10 Thread Guillaume Nault
On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:52:37PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 18:16:45 + Tom Parkin wrote: > > This small RFC series implements a suggestion from Guillaume Nault in > > response to my previous submission to add an ac/pppoe driver to the l2tp > > subsystem[1]. > > > > Fo

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-09 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 18:16:45 + Tom Parkin wrote: > This small RFC series implements a suggestion from Guillaume Nault in > response to my previous submission to add an ac/pppoe driver to the l2tp > subsystem[1]. > > Following Guillaume's advice, this series adds an ioctl to the ppp code > to a

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] add ppp_generic ioctl to bridge channels

2020-11-09 Thread Guillaume Nault
On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 06:16:45PM +, Tom Parkin wrote: > This small RFC series implements a suggestion from Guillaume Nault in > response to my previous submission to add an ac/pppoe driver to the l2tp > subsystem[1]. > > Following Guillaume's advice, this series adds an ioctl to the ppp code