linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/4] several updates to virtio/vsock

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d74c1777-645f-82af-fb31-b89021ac6440@sberdevices.ru>
Date:   Fri, 10 Mar 2023 15:40:51 +0300
From:   Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@...rdevices.ru>
To:     Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
CC:     Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>,
        Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <kernel@...rdevices.ru>, <oxffffaa@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/4] several updates to virtio/vsock



On 10.03.2023 14:40, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 12:42:13PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10.03.2023 12:09, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>>> Hi Arseniy,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 11:24:42PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> this patchset evolved from previous v2 version (see link below). It does
>>>> several updates to virtio/vsock:
>>>> 1) Changes 'virtio_transport_inc/dec_rx_pkt()' interface. Now instead of
>>>>   using skbuff state ('head' and 'data' pointers) to update 'fwd_cnt'
>>>>   and 'rx_bytes', integer value is passed as an input argument. This
>>>>   makes code more simple, because in this case we don't need to update
>>>>   skbuff state before calling 'virtio_transport_inc/dec_rx_pkt()'. In
>>>>   more common words - we don't need to change skbuff state to update
>>>>   'rx_bytes' and 'fwd_cnt' correctly.
>>>> 2) For SOCK_STREAM, when copying data to user fails, current skbuff is
>>>>   not dropped. Next read attempt will use same skbuff and last offset.
>>>>   Instead of 'skb_dequeue()', 'skb_peek()' + '__skb_unlink()' are used.
>>>>   This behaviour was implemented before skbuff support.
>>>> 3) For SOCK_SEQPACKET it removes unneeded 'skb_pull()' call, because for
>>>>   this type of socket each skbuff is used only once: after removing it
>>>>   from socket's queue, it will be freed anyway.
>>>
>>> thanks for the fixes, I would wait a few days to see if there are any
>>> comments and then I think you can send it on net without RFC.
>>>
>>> @Bobby if you can take a look, your ack would be appreciated :-)
>> Ok, thanks for review. I'll wait for several days and also wait until
>> net-next will be opened. Then i'll resend this patchset with net-next
> 
> Since they are fixes, they should go with the net tree, not net-next.
Ah ok, for net tree i can send it no matter that net-next is closed.

Thanks, Arseniy
> 
> Cheers,
> Stefano
>