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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 2 Dec 2019 13:52:38 -0800
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     tglx@...utronix.de, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bpf and local lock

On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:14:33AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> 
> Thomas,
> 
> I am working on eliminating the explicit softirq disables around BPF
> program invocation and replacing it with local lock usage instead.
> 
> We would really need to at least have the non-RT stubs upstream to
> propagate this cleanly, do you think this is possible?

Hi Thomas,

seconding the same question: any chance local lock api can be sent upstream
soon? If api skeleton can get in during this merge window we will have the next
bpf-next/net-next cycle to sort out details. If not the bpf+rt would need to
wait one more release. Not a big deal. Just trying to figure out a time line
when can we start working on concrete bpf+rt patches.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists