netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next V2 0/6] XDP rx handler

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]

Date:   Thu, 16 Aug 2018 12:24:07 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@...hat.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, mst@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next V2 0/6] XDP rx handler



On 2018年08月16日 12:05, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 11:34:20AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> Nothing about the topology is hard coded. The idea is to mimic a
>>> hardware pipeline and acknowledging that a port device can have an
>>> arbitrary layers stacked on it - multiple vlan devices, bonds, macvlans, etc
>> I may miss something but BPF forbids loop. Without a loop how can we make
>> sure all stacked devices is enumerated correctly without knowing the
>> topology in advance?
> not following. why do you need a loop to implement macvlan as an xdp prog?
> if loop is needed, such algorithm is not going to scale whether
> it's implemented as bpf program or as in-kernel c code.

David said the port can have arbitrary layers stacked on it. So if we 
try to enumerate them before making forwarding decisions purely by BPF 
program, it looks to me a loop is needed here.

Thanks