netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] xsk: store struct xdp_sock as a flexible array member of the XSKMAP

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]

Message-ID: <CAJ+HfNhoRy=mEw=qNRCYwjcn+cANb0wTO4kgs=iU4W0bvoPyVw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:54:04 +0100
From:   Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc:     Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...il.com>,
        "Karlsson, Magnus" <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
        "Fijalkowski, Maciej" <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>,
        Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
        Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] xsk: store struct xdp_sock as a flexible
 array member of the XSKMAP

On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 19:01, Jakub Kicinski
<jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 11:32:18 +0200, Björn Töpel wrote:
> > From: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>
> >
> > Prior this commit, the array storing XDP socket instances were stored
> > in a separate allocated array of the XSKMAP. Now, we store the sockets
> > as a flexible array member in a similar fashion as the arraymap. Doing
> > so, we do less pointer chasing in the lookup.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>
>
> Damn, looks like I managed to reply to v2.
>

No worries! Thanks for taking a second look.

> I think the size maths may overflow on 32bit machines on the addition.

Ugh, right. Re-reading the older threads. Thanks for pointing this
out!I'll get back with a v4.


Björn