[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <599162CA.4080504@iogearbox.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 10:43:54 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
CC: davem@...emloft.net, mst@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kubakici@...pl
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2 3/3] tap: XDP support
On 08/11/2017 01:41 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> This patch tries to implement XDP for tun. The implementation was
> split into two parts:
[...]
> @@ -1402,6 +1521,22 @@ static ssize_t tun_get_user(struct tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile,
> skb_reset_network_header(skb);
> skb_probe_transport_header(skb, 0);
>
> + if (generic_xdp) {
> + struct bpf_prog *xdp_prog;
> + int ret;
> +
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + xdp_prog = rcu_dereference(tun->xdp_prog);
The name generic_xdp is a bit confusing in this context given this
is 'native' XDP, perhaps above if (generic_xdp) should have a comment
explaining semantics for tun and how it relates to actual generic xdp
that sits at dev->xdp_prog, and gets run from netif_rx_ni(). Or just
name the bool xdp_handle_gso with a comment that we let the generic
XDP infrastructure deal with non-linear skbs instead of having to
re-implement the do_xdp_generic() internals, plus a statement that
the actual generic XDP comes a bit later in the path. That would at
least make it more obvious to read, imho.
> + if (xdp_prog) {
> + ret = do_xdp_generic(xdp_prog, skb);
> + if (ret != XDP_PASS) {
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + return total_len;
> + }
> + }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + }
> +
> rxhash = __skb_get_hash_symmetric(skb);
> #ifndef CONFIG_4KSTACKS
> tun_rx_batched(tun, tfile, skb, more);
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists