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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <574F17CC.8020704@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 10:13:48 -0700 From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com> To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org Cc: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, dinan.gunawardena@...ronome.com Subject: Re: [RFC 02/12] net: cls_bpf: add hardware offload On 16-06-01 09:50 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > This patch adds hardware offload capability to cls_bpf classifier, > similar to what have been done with U32 and flower. > > Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com> > Reviewed-by: Dinan Gunawardena <dgunawardena@...ronome.com> > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com> > --- Nice! [...] > +static void cls_bpf_stop_offload(struct tcf_proto *tp, > + struct cls_bpf_prog *prog) > +{ > + struct net_device *dev = tp->q->dev_queue->dev; > + > + if (!prog->offloaded) > + return; > + if (WARN_ON(!tc_should_offload(dev, 0))) > + return; This warn on is a bit concerning it looks like you can get a program stuck in hardware but removed from the software stack. Any idea why this could happen? I think it is better to solve the root problem or just remove this if its dbg code. One thought is you need to block disabling the ethtool flag if the hardware has running ebpf codes. Haven't got to the driver patches yet though so not sure if you did this or not. And now that I think about it I better go check the other drivers. > + > + if (cls_bpf_offload_cmd(tp, prog, TC_CLSBPF_DESTROY)) { > + pr_err("Stopping hardware offload failed!\n"); > + return; > + } > + > + prog->offloaded = false; > +} > + > static int cls_bpf_init(struct tcf_proto *tp) > { > struct cls_bpf_head *head; > @@ -179,6 +246,7 @@ static int cls_bpf_delete(struct tcf_proto *tp, unsigned long arg) > { > struct cls_bpf_prog *prog = (struct cls_bpf_prog *) arg; > > + cls_bpf_stop_offload(tp, prog); > list_del_rcu(&prog->link); > tcf_unbind_filter(tp, &prog->res); > call_rcu(&prog->rcu, __cls_bpf_delete_prog); > @@ -195,6 +263,7 @@ static bool cls_bpf_destroy(struct tcf_proto *tp, bool force) > return false; > > list_for_each_entry_safe(prog, tmp, &head->plist, link) { > + cls_bpf_stop_offload(tp, prog); > list_del_rcu(&prog->link); > tcf_unbind_filter(tp, &prog->res); > call_rcu(&prog->rcu, __cls_bpf_delete_prog); > @@ -415,6 +484,8 @@ static int cls_bpf_change(struct net *net, struct sk_buff *in_skb, > if (ret < 0) > goto errout; > > + cls_bpf_offload(tp, prog, oldprog); > + > if (oldprog) { > list_replace_rcu(&oldprog->link, &prog->link); > tcf_unbind_filter(tp, &oldprog->res); > Otherwise this looks really good. .John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists