linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/8] net: gro: decouple GRO from the NAPI layer

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: <20250113130104.5c2c02e0@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:01:04 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>, Daniel Xu
 <dxu@...uu.xyz>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann
 <daniel@...earbox.net>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, John Fastabend
 <john.fastabend@...il.com>, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
 <toke@...nel.org>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>, Martin KaFai
 Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/8] net: gro: decouple GRO from the NAPI
 layer

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:50:02 +0100 Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
> Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2025 15:24:16 +0100
> 
> > On 1/7/25 4:29 PM, Alexander Lobakin wrote:  
> >> @@ -623,21 +622,21 @@ static gro_result_t napi_skb_finish(struct napi_struct *napi,
> >>  	return ret;
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> -gro_result_t napi_gro_receive(struct napi_struct *napi, struct sk_buff *skb)
> >> +gro_result_t gro_receive_skb(struct gro_node *gro, struct sk_buff *skb)
> >>  {
> >>  	gro_result_t ret;
> >>  
> >> -	skb_mark_napi_id(skb, napi);
> >> +	__skb_mark_napi_id(skb, gro->napi_id);  
> > 
> > Is this the only place where gro->napi_id is needed? If so, what about
> > moving skb_mark_napi_id() in napi_gro_receive() and remove such field?  
> 
> Yes, only here. I thought of this, too. But this will increase the
> object code of each napi_gro_receive() caller as it's now inline. So I
> stopped on this one.
> What do you think?

What if we make napi_gro_receive() a real function (not inline) 
and tail call gro_receive_skb()? Is the compiler not clever 
enough too optimize that?

Very nice work in general, the napi_id is gro sticks out..