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:   Sat, 20 Jun 2020 12:42:36 +0200
From:   Kal Cutter Conley <>
To:     Jonathan Lemon <>
Cc:     Saeed Mahameed <>,
        "" <>,
        Maxim Mikityanskiy <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        Tariq Toukan <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: net/mlx5e: bind() always returns EINVAL with XDP_ZEROCOPY

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 5:23 PM Jonathan Lemon <> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 10:55:30AM +0200, Kal Cutter Conley wrote:
> > Hi Saeed,
> > Thanks for explaining the reasoning behind the special mlx5 queue
> > numbering with XDP zerocopy.
> >
> > We have a process using AF_XDP that also shares the network interface
> > with other processes on the system. ethtool rx flow classification
> > rules are used to route the traffic to the appropriate XSK queue
> > N..(2N-1). The issue is these queues are only valid as long they are
> > active (as far as I can tell). This means if my AF_XDP process dies
> > other processes no longer receive ingress traffic routed over queues
> > N..(2N-1) even though my XDP program is still loaded and would happily
> > always return XDP_PASS. Other drivers do not have this usability issue
> > because they use queues that are always valid. Is there a simple
> > workaround for this issue? It seems to me queues N..(2N-1) should
> > simply map to 0..(N-1) when they are not active?
> If your XDP program returns XDP_PASS, the packet should be delivered to
> the xsk socket.  If the application isn't running, where would it go?
> I do agree that the usability of this can be improved.  What if the flow
> rules are inserted and removed along with queue creatioin/destruction?

I think I misunderstood your suggestion here. Do you mean the rules
should be inserted / removed on the hardware level but still show in
ethtool even if they are not active in the hardware? In this case the
rules always occupy a "location" but just never apply if the
respective queues are not "enabled". I think this would be the best
possible solution.

> --
> Jonathan


Powered by blists - more mailing lists