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  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:   Thu, 2 Nov 2017 11:43:48 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <>
To:     Willem de Bruijn <>
Cc:     Network Development <>,
        LKML <>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <>,
        Tom Herbert <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2 1/3] tun: abstract flow steering logic

On 2017年11月02日 09:11, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 7:32 PM, Jason Wang <> wrote:
>> tun now use flow caches based automatic queue steering method. This
>> may not suffice all user cases. To extend it to be able to use more
>> flow steering policy, this patch abstracts flow steering logic into
>> tun_steering_ops, then we can declare and use different methods in
>> the future.
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <>
>> ---
>>   drivers/net/tun.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>>   1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
>> index ea29da9..bff6259 100644
> The previous RFC enabled support for multiple pluggable steering
> policies. But as all can be implemented in BPF and we only plan to
> support an eBPF policy besides the legacy one, this patch is no longer
> needed. We can save a few indirect function calls.

But we should at least support two kinds of steering policy, so this is 
still needed?

And I'm not quite sure we can implement all kinds of policies through 
BPF e.g RSS or we may want to offload the queue selection to underlayer 
switch or nic .


Powered by blists - more mailing lists