netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] packet: rework packet_pick_tx

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 19 Mar 2019 14:06:37 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     pabeni@...hat.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, mike.marciniszyn@...el.com,
        dledford@...hat.com, j.vosburgh@...il.com, saeedb@...zon.com,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, aelior@...vell.com, vishal@...lsio.com,
        jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, salil.mehta@...wei.com,
        tariqt@...lanox.com, kys@...rosoft.com, kvalo@...eaurora.org,
        wei.liu2@...rix.com, johannes@...solutions.net,
        willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] packet: rework packet_pick_tx_queue() to
 use common code selection

From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 14:25:01 +0100

> Currently packet_pick_tx_queue() is the only caller of
> ndo_select_queue() using a fallback argument other than
> __netdev_pick_tx.
> 
> Leveraging rx queue, we can obtain a similar queue selection
> behavior using core helpers. After this change, ndo_select_queue()
> is always invoked with __netdev_pick_tx() as fallback.
> We can change ndo_select_queue() signature in a followup patch,
> dropping an indirect call per transmitted packet in some scenarios
> (e.g. TCP syn and XDP generic xmit)
> 
> This changes slightly how af packet queue selection happens when
> PACKET_QDISC_BYPASS is set. It's now more similar to plan dev_queue_xmit()
> tacking in account both XPS and TC mapping.
> 
>  RFC -> v1:
>   - initialize sender_cpu to the expected value
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>

To reply indirectly to Eric's feedback.  I agree with him that maybe these
should have different names.

But having a global symbol for networking be core_*() doesn't sit
right with me.

netdev_core_*() might be better.