netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v1 02/10] net: Introduce direct data placement tcp offload

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]

Date:   Thu, 8 Oct 2020 14:47:08 -0700
From:   Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
To:     Boris Pismenny <borisp@...lanox.com>, kuba@...nel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, saeedm@...dia.com, hch@....de, axboe@...com,
        kbusch@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, edumazet@...gle.com
Cc:     Yoray Zack <yorayz@...lanox.com>,
        Ben Ben-Ishay <benishay@...lanox.com>,
        boris.pismenny@...il.com, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v1 02/10] net: Introduce direct data
 placement tcp offload


> + * tcp_ddp.h
> + *	Author:	Boris Pismenny <borisp@...lanox.com>
> + *	Copyright (C) 2020 Mellanox Technologies.
> + */
> +#ifndef _TCP_DDP_H
> +#define _TCP_DDP_H
> +
> +#include <linux/blkdev.h>

Why is blkdev.h needed?

> +#include <linux/netdevice.h>
> +#include <net/inet_connection_sock.h>
> +#include <net/sock.h>
> +
> +/* limits returned by the offload driver, zero means don't care */
> +struct tcp_ddp_limits {
> +	int	 max_ddp_sgl_len;
> +};
> +
> +enum tcp_ddp_type {
> +	TCP_DDP_NVME = 1,
> +};
> +
> +struct tcp_ddp_config {
> +	enum tcp_ddp_type    type;
> +	unsigned char        buf[];

A little kdoc may help here as its not exactly clear what is
buf used for (at this point at least)...

> +};
> +
> +struct nvme_tcp_config {

struct nvme_tcp_ddp_config

> +	struct tcp_ddp_config   cfg;
> +
> +	u16			pfv;
> +	u8			cpda;
> +	u8			dgst;
> +	int			queue_size;
> +	int			queue_id;
> +	int			io_cpu;
> +};
> +

Other than that this looks good to me.