linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 2/4] net/udpgso_bench

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: <5061E2A7-EF7A-4C3C-9819-34AA8DE2CD0F@appneta.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 May 2019 19:10:05 -0700
From:   Fred Klassen <fklassen@...neta.com>
To:     Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/4] net/udpgso_bench_tx: options to exercise TX CMSG

> 
> To ensure that we do not regress, when adding options, please consider
> (just a general suggestion, not a strong request for this patch set)
> updating the kselftest to run a variant of the test with the new code
> coverage. In this case, make the code pass/fail instead of only user
> interpretable and add variants to udpgso.sh.

I had a look at how kselftest works, and I absolutely want to see this
work with these changes. I’ll investigate and implement in v2 patch.

I will most likely do a 5 second test. This seems to be sufficient to get
meaningful results

> can use more precise CMSG_SPACE based on worst case expectations, like
> in udp_sendmmsg
> 
>> +       char buf[1500];
> 
> no need for payload
> 
>> +static void flush_errqueue(int fd)
>> +{
>> +       if (cfg_poll) {
>> +               struct pollfd fds = { 0 };
>> +               int ret;
>> +
>> +               fds.fd = fd;
>> +               fds.events = POLLERR;
> 
> no need to pass POLLERR, it is always returned in revents.