netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/9] xdp: initialize xdp

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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200904093542.4dc43682@carbon>
Date:   Fri, 4 Sep 2020 09:35:42 +0200
From:   Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
To:     Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com, echaudro@...hat.com,
        sameehj@...zon.com, kuba@...nel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com,
        daniel@...earbox.net, ast@...nel.org, shayagr@...zon.com,
        brouer@...hat.com,
        intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/9] xdp: initialize xdp_buff mb bit to 0 in
 all XDP drivers

On Thu,  3 Sep 2020 22:58:46 +0200
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org> wrote:

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> index 0b675c34ce49..20c8fd3cd4a3 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> @@ -2298,6 +2298,7 @@ static int ixgbe_clean_rx_irq(struct ixgbe_q_vector *q_vector,
>  #if (PAGE_SIZE < 8192)
>  	xdp.frame_sz = ixgbe_rx_frame_truesize(rx_ring, 0);
>  #endif
> +	xdp.mb = 0;
>  
>  	while (likely(total_rx_packets < budget)) {
>  		union ixgbe_adv_rx_desc *rx_desc;

In this ixgbe driver you are smart and init the xdp.mb bit outside the
(like xdp.frame_sz, when frame_sz is constant).   This is a nice
optimization, but the driver developer that adds XDP multi-buffer
support must remember to reset it.  The patch itself is okay, it is
just something to keep in-mind when reviewing/changing drivers.

-- 
Best regards,
  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
  MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
  LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer