linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 37/48] ceph: Use sendmsg(MSG_SPLICE

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: <1814785.1680510766@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Mon, 03 Apr 2023 09:32:46 +0100
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 37/48] ceph: Use sendmsg(MSG_SPLICE_PAGES) rather than sendpage()

Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com> wrote:

> On 3/30/23 14:48, David Howells wrote:
> > Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> BTW, will this two patch depend on the others in this patch series ?
> > Yes.  You'll need patches that affect TCP at least so that TCP supports
> > MSG_SPLICE_PAGES, so 04-08 and perhaps 09.  It's also on top of the
> > patches that remove ITER_PIPE on my iov-extract branch, but I don't think
> > that should affect you.
> 
> Why I asked this is because I only could see these two ceph relevant patches
> currently.

Depends on how you defined 'relevant', I guess.  Only two patches modify ceph
directly, but there's a dependency: to make those work, TCP needs altering
also.

David