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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89i+AZ9PnRssWpiE5zj41V1=85Jcy80Rtbp7mLjp73Y71Pw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Jul 2020 08:24:55 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-team <kernel-team@...com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...lanox.com>,
        bjorn.topel@...el.com, magnus.karlsson@...el.com,
        borisp@...lanox.com, david@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 08/21] skbuff: add a zc_netgpu bitflag

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:20 AM Jonathan Lemon
<jonathan.lemon@...il.com> wrote:
>
> This could likely be moved elsewhere.  The presence of the flag on
> the skb indicates that one of the fragments may contain zerocopy
> RX data, where the data is not accessible to the cpu.

Why do we need yet another flag in skb exactly ?

Please define what means "data not accessible to the cpu" ?

This kind of change is a red flag for me.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ