netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/4] net/smc: Introduce BPF injection capability

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: <25cee0eb-a1f9-9f0b-9987-ca6e79e6b752@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Mar 2023 11:05:46 +0800
From:   "D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     kgraul@...ux.ibm.com, wenjia@...ux.ibm.com, jaka@...ux.ibm.com,
        ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org
Cc:     kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/4] net/smc: Introduce BPF injection
 capability



On 3/1/23 12:38 AM, D. Wythe wrote:
> From: "D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>
>
> This patches attempt to introduce BPF injection capability for SMC,
> and add selftest to ensure code stability.
>
> As we all know that the SMC protocol is not suitable for all scenarios,
> especially for short-lived. However, for most applications, they cannot
> guarantee that there are no such scenarios at all. Therefore, apps
> may need some specific strategies to decide shall we need to use SMC
> or not, for example, apps can limit the scope of the SMC to a specific
> IP address or port.
>
> Based on the consideration of transparent replacement, we hope that apps
> can remain transparent even if they need to formulate some specific
> strategies for SMC using. That is, do not need to recompile their code.
>
> On the other hand, we need to ensure the scalability of strategies
> implementation. Although it is simple to use socket options or sysctl,
> it will bring more complexity to subsequent expansion.
>
> Fortunately, BPF can solve these concerns very well, users can write
> thire own strategies in eBPF to choose whether to use SMC or not.
> And it's quite easy for them to modify their strategies in the future.
>
> This patches implement injection capability for SMC via struct_ops.
> In that way, we can add new injection scenarios in the future.
>
> v4 -> v3:
>      1. fix compile error and warning
>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202302282100.x7qq7PGX-lkp@intel.com/

Hi Wenjia and all,

I wondering if there are any more questions about this PATCH, This patch 
seems to have been hanging for some time.

If you have any questions, please let me know.


Thanks,

D. Wythe


Do you have any questions about this PATCH?  If you have any other 
questions, please let me know.