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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 3 May 2022 12:24:23 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...dia.com> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Boris Pismenny <borisp@...dia.com>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tls: Add opt-in zerocopy mode of sendfile() On Tue, 3 May 2022 21:56:48 +0300 Maxim Mikityanskiy wrote: > >> Yes, I agree that if the application opted in, it should work properly > >> regardless of whether the optimization actually did turn on. However, > >> the indication could be useful, for example, for diagnostic purposes, to > >> show the user whether zerocopy mode was enabled, if someone is trying to > >> debug some performance issue. If you insist, though, I can make > >> setsockopt succeed and getsockopt return 1. What do you think? > > > > I'd say "whether the optimization is applicable" rather than "whether > > the optimization is turned on". User can check whether the connection > > is using SW or HW TLS if they want to make sure it's taken advantage of. > > > > Speaking of which, should we report the state of this knob via socket > > diag? > > That sounds like an option, I'll take a look. TLS doesn't expose > anything via diag yet, does it? The only option to distinguish SW/HW TLS > is ethtool, and there is no per-socket check, right? Cause a HW TLS > socket can downgrade to SW after tls_device_down, and ethtool won't show it. It does - look for tls_get_info()
Powered by blists - more mailing lists