netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH 1/5] bpf: introduce new bpf cpu map type BPF_MAP_TYPE

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 29 Sep 2017 11:40:48 +0200
From:   Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, mchan@...adcom.com,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        peter.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com,
        Daniel Borkmann <borkmann@...earbox.net>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>, edumazet@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 1/5] bpf: introduce new bpf cpu map type BPF_MAP_TYPE_CPUMAP

Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> writes:

> On Fri, 2017-09-29 at 09:56 +0200, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>> [adding Paolo, Eric]
>> 
>> Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 02:57:08PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> > > +	wake_up_process(rcpu->kthread);
>> > 
>> > In general the whole thing looks like 'threaded NAPI' that Hannes was
>> > proposing some time back. I liked it back then and I like it now.
>> > I don't remember what were the objections back then.
>> > Something scheduler related?
>> > Adding Hannes.
>
> Beyond the added scheduling complexity, the threaded NAPI
> implementation proposed some time ago also possibly introduced OoO
> packet delivery, because the NAPI threads were left unbound to any CPU.

Right, yes, but that can be resolved. The problem was just in that
particular patch.