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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 23 Sep 2016 07:13:30 -0400
From:   Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:     Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     kernel-team@...com, tariqt@...lanox.com, bblanco@...mgrid.com,
        alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
        brouer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/3] xdp: Infrastructure to generalize XDP

On 16-09-20 06:00 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> This patch creates an infrastructure for registering and running code at
> XDP hooks in drivers. This is based on the orignal XDP?BPF and borrows
> heavily from the techniques used by netfilter to make generic nfhooks.
>
> An XDP hook is defined by the  xdp_hook_ops. This structure contains the
> ops of an XDP hook. A pointer to this structure is passed into the XDP
> register function to set up a hook. The XDP register function mallocs
> its own xdp_hook_ops structure and copies the values from the
> xdp_hook_ops passed in. The register function also stores the pointer
> value of the xdp_hook_ops argument; this pointer is used in subsequently
> calls to XDP to identify the registered hook.
>
> The interface is defined in net/xdp.h. This includes the definition of
> xdp_hook_ops, functions to register and unregister hook ops on a device
> or individual instances of napi, and xdp_hook_run that is called by
> drivers to run the hooks.
>

Tom,
perused the thread and it seems you are serious ;->
Are we heading towards Frankenstein Avenue?
The whole point behind letting in XDP is so that _small programs_
can be written to do some quick thing. eBPF 4K program limit was
touted as the check and bound. eBPF sounded fine.
This sounds like a huge contradiction.

cheers,
jamal


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ