linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] tun: rcu_deference 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: <CF84F28E-C3D0-44C0-8540-53E184BA1F79@nutanix.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 03:13:18 +0000
From: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
CC: "ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>,
        "daniel@...earbox.net"
	<daniel@...earbox.net>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "hawk@...nel.org" <hawk@...nel.org>,
        "john.fastabend@...il.com" <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "bpf@...r.kernel.org"
	<bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "aleksander.lobakin@...el.com"
	<aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, Andrew Lunn
	<andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni
	<pabeni@...hat.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] tun: rcu_deference xdp_prog only once per
 batch



> On May 7, 2025, at 4:43 PM, Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> !-------------------------------------------------------------------|
>  CAUTION: External Email
> 
> |-------------------------------------------------------------------!
> 
> Jon Kohler wrote:
>> Hoist rcu_dereference(tun->xdp_prog) out of tun_xdp_one, so that
>> rcu_deference is called once during batch processing.
> 
> I'm skeptical that this does anything.
> 
> The compiler can inline tun_xdp_one and indeed seems to do so. And
> then it can cache the read in a register if that is the best use of
> a register.

The thought here is that if a compiler decided to not-inline tun_xdp_one
(perhaps it grew to big, or the compiler was being sassy), that the intent
would simply be that this wants to be called once-and-only-once. This
change just makes that intent more clear, and is a nice little cleanup.

I’ve got a series that stacks on top of this that enables multi-buffer support
and I can keep an eye on if that gets inlined or not.

> 
>> 
>> No functional change intended.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>