netdev - Re: [PATCH V5 2/6 net-next] netdevice.h: Add zero-copy flag in netdevice

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: <1305675865.10756.63.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Tue, 17 May 2011 16:44:25 -0700
From:	Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
To:	Michał Mirosław <mirqus@...il.com>
Cc:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 2/6 net-next] netdevice.h: Add zero-copy flag in
 netdevice

On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 00:58 +0200, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> W dniu 18 maja 2011 00:28 użytkownik Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
> napisał:
> > On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:48 +0200, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> >> 2011/5/17 Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>:
> >> > Looks like to use a new flag requires more time/work. I am
> thinking
> >> > whether we can just use HIGHDMA flag to enable zero-copy in
> macvtap
> >> to
> >> > avoid the new flag for now since mavctap uses real NICs as lower
> >> device?
> >>
> >> Is there any other restriction besides requiring driver to not
> recycle
> >> the skb? Are there any drivers that recycle TX skbs?
> > Not more other restrictions, skb clone is OK. pskb_expand_head()
> looks
> > OK to me from code review.
> 
> > Currently there is no drivers recycle TX skbs.
> 
> So why do you require the target device to have some flags at all?

We could use macvtap to check lower device HIGHDMA to enable zero-copy,
but I am not sure whether it is sufficient. If it's sufficient then we
don't need to use a new flag here. To be safe, it's better to use a new
flag to enable each device who can pass zero-copy test.

> Do I understand correctly, that this zero-copy feature is about
> packets received from VMs?

Yes, packets sent from VMs, and received in local host for TX zero-copy
here.

Thanks
Shirley



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html