netdev - Re: Co-existing XDP generic and native mode? (Re: [PATCH bpf-next v5 5/8] xdp: Provide extack messages when prog attachment failed)

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: <abc267ff-1c6c-9013-d5b4-628a0bab12f1@iogearbox.net>
Date:   Fri, 1 Feb 2019 22:33:22 +0100
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
Cc:     ast@...nel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Maciej Fijalkowski <maciejromanfijalkowski@...il.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: Co-existing XDP generic and native mode? (Re: [PATCH bpf-next v5
 5/8] xdp: Provide extack messages when prog attachment failed)

On 02/01/2019 07:47 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
[...]
>> These are only refactor ideas, so if you can argue why your internal
>> feature request for simultaneous generic and native make more sense,
>> then I'm open for allowing this ?
> 
> The request was actually to enable xdpoffload and xdpgeneric at the
> same time.  I'm happy to have that as another HW offload exclusive
> for now :)

The latter is probably fine, though what's the concrete use case? :)
Reason we kept native vs generic separate is mainly so that native XDP
drivers are discouraged to punt missing features to generic hook instead
of properly implementing them in native mode.

Thanks,
Daniel