netdev - Re: Offloaded u32 classifier tables WAS (Re: [PATCH net 00/13] cls

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: <f4d49de3-e334-5319-9fe7-828f0625bc36@mojatatu.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Sep 2018 08:31:00 -0400
From:   Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Rahul Lakkireddy <rahul.lakkireddy@...lsio.com>,
        Kumar A S <kumaras@...lsio.com>,
        Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
        Amritha Nambiar <amritha.nambiar@...el.com>,
        Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com, peppe.cavallaro@...com,
        alexandre.torgue@...com,
        Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
        Anjali Singhai Jain <anjali.singhai@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Offloaded u32 classifier tables WAS (Re: [PATCH net 00/13]
 cls_u32 cleanups and fixes.

On 2018-09-10 8:25 a.m., Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> On 2018-09-09 11:48 a.m., Al Viro wrote:
> 
>>
>> BTW, shouldn't we issue u32_clear_hw_hnode() every time
>> we destroy an hnode?  It's done on u32_delete(), it's
>> done (for root ht) on u32_destroy(), but it's not done
>> for any other hnodes when you remove the entire (not shared)
>> filter.  Looks fishy...
>>
> 
> What you are saying makes sense, but that doesnt seem
> like a new thing.
> All hardware offload examples I have seen use root tables
> only[1]. So I am not sure if they use any other tables
> although the intel hardware at least seems very capable.
> Look at ixgbe_main.c for example. Theres an explicit assumption
> that root is always 0x800 but oresence of
>

"..but presence of other tables can be handled"

cheers,
jamal