netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 07/17] libbpf: Support drivers with non-combined channels

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:   Fri, 14 Jun 2019 21:50:53 +0200
From:   Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>
To:     Maciej Fijalkowski <maciejromanfijalkowski@...il.com>,
        Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
        "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Jonathan Lemon <bsd@...com>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 07/17] libbpf: Support drivers with
 non-combined channels

On 2019-06-14 19:15, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> Why would I want to run AF_XDP without ZC? The main reason for having AF_XDP
> support in drivers is the zero copy, right?

In general I agree with you on this point. Short-term, I see copy-mode
useful for API adoption reasons (as XDP_SKB), so from that perspecitve
it's important. Longer term I'd like to explore AF_XDP as a faster
AF_PACKET for pcap functionality.


Björn