* [PATCH] suricata: 'Downdate' to 5.0.5 @ 2020-12-12 9:14 Matthias Fischer 2020-12-14 9:33 ` Michael Tremer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Matthias Fischer @ 2020-12-12 9:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: development [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 905 bytes --] Triggered by https://lists.ipfire.org/pipermail/development/2020-December/008868.html Workaround for https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12548 Downgrading to 'suricata 5.0.5' bypasses Bug #12548 for now, but its only a temporary workaround... Signed-off-by: Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> --- lfs/suricata | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lfs/suricata b/lfs/suricata index 2871d8e7b..c5dc46af4 100644 --- a/lfs/suricata +++ b/lfs/suricata @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ include Config -VER = 6.0.0 +VER = 5.0.5 THISAPP = suricata-$(VER) DL_FILE = $(THISAPP).tar.gz @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ objects = $(DL_FILE) $(DL_FILE) = $(DL_FROM)/$(DL_FILE) -$(DL_FILE)_MD5 = bbddcf2f209930206ef21977d40120d2 +$(DL_FILE)_MD5 = fe039cc4571eb56828874ddc0b71dc51 install : $(TARGET) -- 2.18.0 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] suricata: 'Downdate' to 5.0.5 2020-12-12 9:14 [PATCH] suricata: 'Downdate' to 5.0.5 Matthias Fischer @ 2020-12-14 9:33 ` Michael Tremer 2020-12-14 20:02 ` Matthias Fischer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Michael Tremer @ 2020-12-14 9:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: development [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1526 bytes --] Hi, Thank you for submitting this patch. I am not sure if I want to merge this, yet. I will consider this when we move closer to a release, but upstream didn’t provide a solution, yet. I suppose it is okay if we burn through a little bit more of CPU as long as the system is secure. The overhead seems to be small enough for me to not cause any significant impact on throughput or latency. Is this an acceptable benchmark for you? Best, -Michael > On 12 Dec 2020, at 10:14, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> wrote: > > Triggered by https://lists.ipfire.org/pipermail/development/2020-December/008868.html > > Workaround for https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12548 > > Downgrading to 'suricata 5.0.5' bypasses Bug #12548 for now, > but its only a temporary workaround... > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> > --- > lfs/suricata | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lfs/suricata b/lfs/suricata > index 2871d8e7b..c5dc46af4 100644 > --- a/lfs/suricata > +++ b/lfs/suricata > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ > > include Config > > -VER = 6.0.0 > +VER = 5.0.5 > > THISAPP = suricata-$(VER) > DL_FILE = $(THISAPP).tar.gz > @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ objects = $(DL_FILE) > > $(DL_FILE) = $(DL_FROM)/$(DL_FILE) > > -$(DL_FILE)_MD5 = bbddcf2f209930206ef21977d40120d2 > +$(DL_FILE)_MD5 = fe039cc4571eb56828874ddc0b71dc51 > > install : $(TARGET) > > -- > 2.18.0 > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] suricata: 'Downdate' to 5.0.5 2020-12-14 9:33 ` Michael Tremer @ 2020-12-14 20:02 ` Matthias Fischer 2020-12-15 16:12 ` Michael Tremer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Matthias Fischer @ 2020-12-14 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: development [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1825 bytes --] On 14.12.2020 10:33, Michael Tremer wrote: > Hi, Hi, > Thank you for submitting this patch. > > I am not sure if I want to merge this, yet. Yep. Looking at the changelogs I would prefer 6.0.1, but I just wanted to have an alternative ready in case it was needed. > I will consider this when we move closer to a release, but upstream didn’t provide a solution, yet. > > I suppose it is okay if we burn through a little bit more of CPU as long as the system is secure. The overhead seems to be small enough for me to not cause any significant impact on throughput or latency. > > Is this an acceptable benchmark for you? For me: yes. No problem. ;-) Best, Matthias > Best, > -Michael > >> On 12 Dec 2020, at 10:14, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> wrote: >> >> Triggered by https://lists.ipfire.org/pipermail/development/2020-December/008868.html >> >> Workaround for https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12548 >> >> Downgrading to 'suricata 5.0.5' bypasses Bug #12548 for now, >> but its only a temporary workaround... >> >> Signed-off-by: Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> >> --- >> lfs/suricata | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/lfs/suricata b/lfs/suricata >> index 2871d8e7b..c5dc46af4 100644 >> --- a/lfs/suricata >> +++ b/lfs/suricata >> @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ >> >> include Config >> >> -VER = 6.0.0 >> +VER = 5.0.5 >> >> THISAPP = suricata-$(VER) >> DL_FILE = $(THISAPP).tar.gz >> @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ objects = $(DL_FILE) >> >> $(DL_FILE) = $(DL_FROM)/$(DL_FILE) >> >> -$(DL_FILE)_MD5 = bbddcf2f209930206ef21977d40120d2 >> +$(DL_FILE)_MD5 = fe039cc4571eb56828874ddc0b71dc51 >> >> install : $(TARGET) >> >> -- >> 2.18.0 >> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] suricata: 'Downdate' to 5.0.5 2020-12-14 20:02 ` Matthias Fischer @ 2020-12-15 16:12 ` Michael Tremer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Michael Tremer @ 2020-12-15 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: development [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2226 bytes --] Hi, I am now convinced that the impact is bad enough that we will need to revert. I would like to be able to release c153 before Christmas and I am not sure if upstream will be able to provide a hotfix. -Michael > On 14 Dec 2020, at 21:02, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> wrote: > > On 14.12.2020 10:33, Michael Tremer wrote: >> Hi, > > Hi, > >> Thank you for submitting this patch. >> >> I am not sure if I want to merge this, yet. > > Yep. > > Looking at the changelogs I would prefer 6.0.1, but I just wanted to > have an alternative ready in case it was needed. > >> I will consider this when we move closer to a release, but upstream didn’t provide a solution, yet. >> >> I suppose it is okay if we burn through a little bit more of CPU as long as the system is secure. The overhead seems to be small enough for me to not cause any significant impact on throughput or latency. >> >> Is this an acceptable benchmark for you? > > For me: yes. No problem. ;-) > > Best, > Matthias > >> Best, >> -Michael >> >>> On 12 Dec 2020, at 10:14, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> wrote: >>> >>> Triggered by https://lists.ipfire.org/pipermail/development/2020-December/008868.html >>> >>> Workaround for https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12548 >>> >>> Downgrading to 'suricata 5.0.5' bypasses Bug #12548 for now, >>> but its only a temporary workaround... >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> >>> --- >>> lfs/suricata | 4 ++-- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/lfs/suricata b/lfs/suricata >>> index 2871d8e7b..c5dc46af4 100644 >>> --- a/lfs/suricata >>> +++ b/lfs/suricata >>> @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ >>> >>> include Config >>> >>> -VER = 6.0.0 >>> +VER = 5.0.5 >>> >>> THISAPP = suricata-$(VER) >>> DL_FILE = $(THISAPP).tar.gz >>> @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ objects = $(DL_FILE) >>> >>> $(DL_FILE) = $(DL_FROM)/$(DL_FILE) >>> >>> -$(DL_FILE)_MD5 = bbddcf2f209930206ef21977d40120d2 >>> +$(DL_FILE)_MD5 = fe039cc4571eb56828874ddc0b71dc51 >>> >>> install : $(TARGET) >>> >>> -- >>> 2.18.0 >>> >> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-12-15 16:12 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2020-12-12 9:14 [PATCH] suricata: 'Downdate' to 5.0.5 Matthias Fischer 2020-12-14 9:33 ` Michael Tremer 2020-12-14 20:02 ` Matthias Fischer 2020-12-15 16:12 ` Michael Tremer
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox