netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/2] tc: add 'needs

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: <5525F48F.5030108@plumgrid.com>
Date:	Wed, 08 Apr 2015 20:39:59 -0700
From:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	daniel@...earbox.net, tgraf@...g.ch, jiri@...nulli.us,
	jhs@...atatu.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/2] tc: add 'needs_l2' flag to ingress qdisc

On 4/8/15 8:14 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
> Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2015 20:05:13 -0700
>
>> I'm sure there is a way to propagate the offset into the programs.
>> It's not about efficiency of programs, but about consistency.
>> Programs should know nothing about kernel. Sending network offset
>> into them is exposing this very specific kernel behavior.
>
> It can be performed by the data access helpers the JIT'd programs
> have to invoke anyways.

hmm, not sure what you mean.
Let's take specific line from sockex1_kern.c:
int index = load_byte(skb, ETH_HLEN + offsetof(struct iphdr, protocol));
this C code is compiled into
R0 = LD_ABS_B 23
(instruction with fixed offset)
which is being interpreted as:
skb_header_pointer(skb, 23, 1, buffer);
and similar by JITs which are using doing
r0 = *(char *)(skb->data + 23)
in this case.

Are you proposing to change semantics of LD_ABS instruction to use
skb->head + skb->mac_header instead of skb->data in interpreter
and in all JITs?
Performance wise it will be ok, since JITs can cache that pointer.
But that will be huge and very risky change.
I'm not sure yet whether all programs will keep working afterwards.
Is it really worth taking so much risk vs push/pull of L2?
If you say, let's take the risk, sure, I can try hacking all the bits
and see what the cost.
--
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