| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 10:11:15 +0200 From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...e.de> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Cc: johnpol@....mipt.ru, drepper@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: async network I/O, event channels, etc On Thu, Jul 27 2006, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Thu, Jul 27 2006, David Miller wrote: > > From: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru> > > Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 11:49:02 +0400 > > > > > I.e. map skb's data to userspace? Not a good idea especially with it's > > > tricky lifetime and unability for userspace to inform kernel when it > > > finished and skb can be freed (without additional syscall). > > > > Hmmm... > > > > If it is paged based, I do not see the problem. Events and calls to > > AIO I/O routines make transfer of buffer ownership. The fact that > > while kernel (and thus networking stack) "owns" the buffer for an AIO > > call, the user can have a valid mapping to it is a unimportant detail. > > Ownership may be clear, but "when can I reuse" is tricky. The same issue > comes up for vmsplice -> splice to socket. Ownership transition from user -> kernel that is, what I'm trying to say that returning ownership to the user again is the tricky part. -- Jens Axboe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists