linux-kernel - Re: [net-next PATCH 2/5] net: Call sk_mark_napi

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]

Message-ID: <CAKgT0UeEstUeZ8J-Q9EmUvHZS1id=xND=tME9XhKjOOg+t66UQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:36:21 -0700
From:   Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:     Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 2/5] net: Call sk_mark_napi_id() in the ACK
 receive path

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 11:32 -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>> From: Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>
>>
>> Call sk_mark_napi_id() in the ACK receive path of a TCP_NEW_SYN_RECV
>> socket, so that sk->napi_id is set even if the socket hasn't yet received
>> any data.  With this change we should be able to start busy polling
>> slightly earlier.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
>> ---
>>  net/ipv4/tcp_ipv4.c |    1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_ipv4.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_ipv4.c
>> index 08d870e45658..b86002a296f1 100644
>> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_ipv4.c
>> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_ipv4.c
>> @@ -1687,6 +1687,7 @@ int tcp_v4_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb)
>>                       tcp_v4_send_reset(nsk, skb);
>>                       goto discard_and_relse;
>>               } else {
>> +                     sk_mark_napi_id(nsk, skb);
>>                       sock_put(sk);
>>                       return 0;
>>               }
>>
>
> Seems good, but what about IPv6 ?

Sorry, I spaced out and overlooked that this would also be an issue for IPv6.

> Frankly this calls for the sk_mark_napi_id() being done in
> tcp_child_process() instead of its four callers.

We can look into that for the next version.