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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 8 May 2020 14:32:16 +0200
From:   Björn Töpel <>
To:     Maxim Mikityanskiy <>,
        Björn Töpel <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 04/14] xsk: introduce AF_XDP buffer allocation

On 2020-05-08 13:55, Maxim Mikityanskiy wrote:
> On 2020-05-07 13:42, Björn Töpel wrote:
>> From: Björn Töpel <>
>> In order to simplify AF_XDP zero-copy enablement for NIC driver
>> developers, a new AF_XDP buffer allocation API is added. The
>> implementation is based on a single core (single producer/consumer)
>> buffer pool for the AF_XDP UMEM.
>> A buffer is allocated using the xsk_buff_alloc() function, and
>> returned using xsk_buff_free(). If a buffer is disassociated with the
>> pool, e.g. when a buffer is passed to an AF_XDP socket, a buffer is
>> said to be released. Currently, the release function is only used by
>> the AF_XDP internals and not visible to the driver.
>> Drivers using this API should register the XDP memory model with the
>> The API is defined in net/xdp_sock_drv.h.
>> The buffer type is struct xdp_buff, and follows the lifetime of
>> regular xdp_buffs, i.e.  the lifetime of an xdp_buff is restricted to
>> a NAPI context. In other words, the API is not replacing xdp_frames.
>> In addition to introducing the API and implementations, the AF_XDP
>> core is migrated to use the new APIs.
>> rfc->v1: Fixed build errors/warnings for m68k and riscv. (kbuild test
>>           robot)
>>           Added headroom/chunk size getter. (Maxim/Björn)
>> Signed-off-by: Maxim Mikityanskiy <>
>> Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <>
> Björn's signoff should go first (as the original author).

Oh, I didn't know that. I'll fix in the next revision!

Powered by blists - more mailing lists