netdev - Re: IORING_CQE_F

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 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:   Mon, 17 Oct 2022 17:46:57 +0100
From:   Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To:     Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org>,
        io-uring <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dylan Yudaken <dylany@...com>
Subject: Re: IORING_CQE_F_COPIED

Hey Stefan,

On 10/14/22 12:06, Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
> 
> In the tests I made I used this version of IORING_CQE_F_COPIED:
> https://git.samba.org/?p=metze/linux/wip.git;a=commitdiff;h=645d3b584c417a247d92d71baa6266a5f3d0d17d
> (also inlined at the end)
> 
> Would that something we want for 6.1? (Should I post that with a useful commit message, after doing some more tests)

I was thinking, can it be delivered separately but not in the same cqe?
The intention is to keep it off the IO path. For example, it can emit a
zc status CQE or maybe keep a "zc failed" counter inside the ring. Other
options? And we can add a separate callback for that, will make a couple
of things better.

What do you think? Especially from the userspace usability perspective.

-- 
Pavel Begunkov