netdev - Re: [RFC net-next sample action optimization 2/3] openvswitch: Refactor recirc key allocation.

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: <CAPWQB7FsjZ7aUXBT+uH_ht6gu5b4URhAirkX2UX95jTzOZ7g5w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 9 Mar 2017 11:11:02 -0800
From:   Joe Stringer <joe@....org>
To:     Andy Zhou <azhou@....org>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, pravin shelar <pshelar@....org>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next sample action optimization 2/3] openvswitch:
 Refactor recirc key allocation.

On 7 March 2017 at 16:15, Andy Zhou <azhou@....org> wrote:
> The logic of allocating and copy key for each 'exec_actions_level'
> was specific to execute_recirc(). However, future patches will reuse
> as well.  Refactor the logic into its own function clone_key().
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Zhou <azhou@....org>
> ---

<snip>

> @@ -83,14 +83,32 @@ struct action_fifo {
>         struct deferred_action fifo[DEFERRED_ACTION_FIFO_SIZE];
>  };
>
> -struct recirc_keys {
> -       struct sw_flow_key key[OVS_DEFERRED_ACTION_THRESHOLD];
> +struct action_flow_keys {
> +       struct sw_flow_key key[OVS_ACTION_RECURSION_THRESHOLD];
>  };

I thought the old struct name was clearer on how it would be used -
for when actions are deferred.

>
>  static struct action_fifo __percpu *action_fifos;
> -static struct recirc_keys __percpu *recirc_keys;
> +static struct action_flow_keys __percpu *flow_keys;
>  static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, exec_actions_level);
>
> +/* Make a clone of the 'key', using the pre-allocated percpu 'flow_keys'
> + * space. Since the storage is pre-allocated, the caller does not
> + * need to check for NULL return pointer.
> + */

Hmm? if level > OVS_ACTION_RECURSION_THRESHOLD, this function returns NULL.