netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/3] net: bpf jit: x86: optimize choose_load

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: <1381682194.3392.42.camel@edumazet-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Sun, 13 Oct 2013 09:36:34 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Vladimir Murzin <murzin.v@...il.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	av1474@...tv.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] net: bpf jit: x86: optimize choose_load_func error
 path

On Sun, 2013-10-13 at 16:54 +0200, Vladimir Murzin wrote:
> Macro CHOOSE_LOAD_FUNC returns handler for "any offset" if checks for K
> were not passed. At the same time handlers for "any offset" cases make
> the same checks against r_addr at run-time, that will always lead to
> bpf_error.
> 
> Run-time checks are still necessary for indirect load operations, but
> error path for absolute and mesh loads are worth to optimize during bpf
> compile time.

I don't get the point.

What real world use case or problem are you trying to handle ?

bpf_error returns 0, so it seems your patch does the same.

A buggy BPF program should not expect us to 'save' a few cycles.



--
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