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
| ||
|
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