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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 28 Oct 2022 11:04:57 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <>
To:     John Fastabend <>
Cc:     Stanislav Fomichev <>,,,,,,,,,,,
        Willem de Bruijn <>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <>,
        Anatoly Burakov <>,
        Alexander Lobakin <>,
        Magnus Karlsson <>,
        Maryam Tahhan <>,,
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next 0/5] xdp: hints via kfuncs

On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 08:58:18 -0700 John Fastabend wrote:
> A bit of extra commentary. By exposing the raw kptr to the rx
> descriptor we don't need driver writers to do anything.
> And can easily support all the drivers out the gate with simple
> one or two line changes. This pushes the interesting parts
> into userspace and then BPF writers get to do the work without
> bother driver folks and also if its not done today it doesn't
> matter because user space can come along and make it work
> later. So no scattered kernel dependencies which I really
> would like to avoid here. Its actually very painful to have
> to support clusters with N kernels and M devices if they
> have different features. Doable but annoying and much nicer
> if we just say 6.2 has support for kptr rx descriptor reading
> and all XDP drivers support it. So timestamp, rxhash work
> across the board.

IMHO that's a bit of wishful thinking. Driver support is just a small
piece, you'll have different HW and FW versions, feature conflicts etc.
In the end kernel version is just one variable and there are many others
you'll already have to track.

And it's actually harder to abstract away inter HW generation
differences if the user space code has to handle all of it.

> To find the offset of fields (rxhash, timestamp) you can use
> standard BTF relocations we have all this machinery built up
> already for all the other structs we read, net_devices, task
> structs, inodes, ... so its not a big hurdle at all IMO. We
> can add userspace libs if folks really care, but its just a read so
> I'm not even sure that is helpful.
> I think its nicer than having kfuncs that need to be written
> everywhere. My $.02 although I'll poke around with below
> some as well. Feel free to just hang tight until I have some
> code at the moment I have intel, mellanox drivers that I
> would want to support.

I'd prefer if we left the door open for new vendors. Punting descriptor
parsing to user space will indeed result in what you just said - major
vendors are supported and that's it.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists