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: <a222a26b-9b1e-416e-a304-fd9742372c7c@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:50:02 +0100
From: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
CC: Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller"
	<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski
	<kuba@...nel.org>, 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

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?

> 
> /P

Thanks,
Olek