netdev - Re: [PATCH v9 bpf-next 00/14] mvneta: introduce XDP multi-buffer support

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: <efe4fcfa-087b-e025-a371-269ef36a3e86@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Jun 2021 21:41:41 -0600
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, shayagr@...zon.com,
        sameehj@...zon.com, dsahern@...nel.org, brouer@...hat.com,
        echaudro@...hat.com, jasowang@...hat.com,
        alexander.duyck@...il.com, saeed@...nel.org,
        maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com, magnus.karlsson@...el.com,
        tirthendu.sarkar@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 bpf-next 00/14] mvneta: introduce XDP multi-buffer
 support

On 6/22/21 5:18 PM, John Fastabend wrote:
> At this point I don't think we can have a partial implementation. At
> the moment we have packet capture applications and protocol parsers
> running in production. If we allow this to go in staged we are going
> to break those applications that make the fundamental assumption they
> have access to all the data in the packet.

What about cases like netgpu where headers are accessible but data is
not (e.g., gpu memory)? If the API indicates limited buffer access, is
that sufficient?