netdev - Re: [RFC v3 4/5] virtio_ring: add event idx support in packed ring

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]

Message-ID: <9f0b4e37-63ff-42f9-f2e6-3747a19a0206@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 3 May 2018 15:25:29 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Tiwei Bie <tiwei.bie@...el.com>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:     virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        wexu@...hat.com, jfreimann@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 4/5] virtio_ring: add event idx support in packed ring



On 2018年05月03日 10:09, Tiwei Bie wrote:
>>>> So how about we use the straightforward way then?
>>> You mean we do new += vq->vring_packed.num instead
>>> of event_idx -= vq->vring_packed.num before calling
>>> vring_need_event()?
>>>
>>> The problem is that, the second param (new_idx) of
>>> vring_need_event() will be used for:
>>>
>>> (__u16)(new_idx - event_idx - 1)
>>> (__u16)(new_idx - old)
>>>
>>> So if we change new, we will need to change old too.
>> I think that since we have a branch there anyway,
>> we are better off just special-casing if (wrap_counter != vq->wrap_counter).
>> Treat is differenty and avoid casts.
>>
>>> And that would be an ugly hack..
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Tiwei Bie
>> I consider casts and huge numbers with two's complement
>> games even uglier.
> The dependency on two's complement game is introduced
> since the split ring.
>
> In packed ring, old is calculated via:
>
> old = vq->next_avail_idx - vq->num_added;
>
> In split ring, old is calculated via:
>
> old = vq->avail_idx_shadow - vq->num_added;
>
> In both cases, when vq->num_added is bigger, old will
> be a big number.
>
> Best regards,
> Tiwei Bie
>

How about just do something like vhost:

static u16 vhost_idx_diff(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq, u16 old, u16 new)
{
     if (new > old)
         return new - old;
     return  (new + vq->num - old);
}

static bool vhost_vring_packed_need_event(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq,
                       __u16 event_off, __u16 new,
                       __u16 old)
{
     return (__u16)(vhost_idx_diff(vq, new, event_off) - 1) <
            (__u16)vhost_idx_diff(vq, new, old);
}

?