linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 net-next 1/2] net: fec: add XDP

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: <ZNYiSEG5/0cJIZ3f@vergenet.net>
Date:   Fri, 11 Aug 2023 13:58:00 +0200
From:   Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To:     Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, shenwei.wang@....com, xiaoning.wang@....com,
        ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, hawk@...nel.org,
        john.fastabend@...il.com, larysa.zaremba@...el.com,
        aleksander.lobakin@...el.com, jbrouer@...hat.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-imx@....com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 net-next 1/2] net: fec: add XDP_TX feature support

On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 02:45:13PM +0800, Wei Fang wrote:
> The XDP_TX feature is not supported before, and all the frames
> which are deemed to do XDP_TX action actually do the XDP_DROP
> action. So this patch adds the XDP_TX support to FEC driver.
> 
> I tested the performance of XDP_TX in XDP_DRV mode and XDP_SKB
> mode respectively on i.MX8MP-EVK platform, and as suggested by
> Jesper, I also tested the performance of XDP_REDIRECT on the
> same platform. And the test steps and results are as follows.
> 
> XDP_TX test:
> Step 1: One board is used as generator and connects to switch,and
> the FEC port of DUT also connects to the switch. Both boards with
> flow control off. Then the generator runs the
> pktgen_sample03_burst_single_flow.sh script to generate and send
> burst traffic to DUT. Note that the size of packet was set to 64
> bytes and the procotol of packet was UDP in my test scenario. In
> addtion, the SMAC of the packet need to be different from the MAC

nit: addtion -> addition

     checkpatch.pl --codespell is your friend here.

...