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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 02 Dec 2019 15:08:19 -0800 (PST)
From:   David Miller <>
Subject: Re: bpf and local lock

From: Alexei Starovoitov <>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 13:52:38 -0800

> 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.

FWIW, I have some simple patches I'm working on that start to annotate
the bpf function invocation call sites.

And as part of that I add the non-RT stubs plus some new interfaces I
think might be necessary.

I've been told Thomas is going to be offline for another week so I'll
just keep working on this and post when I have something concrete.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists