netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] Change BPF_TEST_RUN use the system page pool for live XDP frames

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: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 09:39:47 +0100
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Cc: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] Change BPF_TEST_RUN use the system page pool
 for live XDP frames

On 2/19/24 7:52 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com> writes:
> 
>> Now that we have a system-wide page pool, we can use that for the live
>> frame mode of BPF_TEST_RUN (used by the XDP traffic generator), and
>> avoid the cost of creating a separate page pool instance for each
>> syscall invocation. See the individual patches for more details.
>>
>> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen (3):
>>    net: Register system page pool as an XDP memory model
>>    bpf: test_run: Use system page pool for XDP live frame mode
>>    bpf: test_run: Fix cacheline alignment of live XDP frame data
>>      structures
>>
>>   include/linux/netdevice.h |   1 +
>>   net/bpf/test_run.c        | 138 +++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>>   net/core/dev.c            |  13 +++-
>>   3 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
> 
> Hi maintainers
> 
> This series is targeting net-next, but it's listed as delegate:bpf in
> patchwork[0]; is that a mistake? Do I need to do anything more to nudge it
> along?

I moved it over to netdev, it would be good next time if there are dependencies
which are in net-next but not yet bpf-next to clearly state them given from this
series the majority touches the bpf test infra code.

> -Toke
> 
> [0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=826384