netdev - Re: [net PATCH v5 1/6] virtio_net: use dev_kfree

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:57:12 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     john.fastabend@...il.com, john.r.fastabend@...el.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, alexei.starovoitov@...il.com,
        daniel@...earbox.net
Subject: Re: [net PATCH v5 1/6] virtio_net: use dev_kfree_skb for small buffer
 XDP receive



On 2017年01月25日 04:08, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 02:43:28PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
>> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 23:08:35 +0200
>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 02:19:50PM -0800, John Fastabend wrote:
>>>> In the small buffer case during driver unload we currently use
>>>> put_page instead of dev_kfree_skb. Resolve this by adding a check
>>>> for virtnet mode when checking XDP queue type. Also name the
>>>> function so that the code reads correctly to match the additional
>>>> check.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: bb91accf2733 ("virtio-net: XDP support for small buffers")
>>>> Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
>>>> Acked-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
>>> Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
>>>
>>> I think we definitely want this one in -net as it's
>>> a bugfix.
>> This whole series is a bug fix, we must have adjust_header XDP
>> support in the virtio_net driver before v4.10 goes out, it is
>> a requires base feature for XDP.
> I have to say device resets outside probe have a huge potential
> to uncover hypervisor bugs.

Maybe not if it reuses most of current codes? Since we've already used 
them in sleep or hibernation?

Thanks

>   I am rather uncomfortable
> doing that after -rc1.
>
> How about a module option to disable it by default?
> We can then ship a partial implementation in 4.10
> and work on completing it in 4.11.
>