netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/4] several updates to virtio/vsock

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]

Date:   Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:42:13 +0300
From:   Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@...rdevices.ru>
To:     Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>,
        Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>
CC:     Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <kernel@...rdevices.ru>, <oxffffaa@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/4] several updates to virtio/vsock



On 10.03.2023 12:09, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> Hi Arseniy,
> 
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 11:24:42PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> this patchset evolved from previous v2 version (see link below). It does
>> several updates to virtio/vsock:
>> 1) Changes 'virtio_transport_inc/dec_rx_pkt()' interface. Now instead of
>>   using skbuff state ('head' and 'data' pointers) to update 'fwd_cnt'
>>   and 'rx_bytes', integer value is passed as an input argument. This
>>   makes code more simple, because in this case we don't need to update
>>   skbuff state before calling 'virtio_transport_inc/dec_rx_pkt()'. In
>>   more common words - we don't need to change skbuff state to update
>>   'rx_bytes' and 'fwd_cnt' correctly.
>> 2) For SOCK_STREAM, when copying data to user fails, current skbuff is
>>   not dropped. Next read attempt will use same skbuff and last offset.
>>   Instead of 'skb_dequeue()', 'skb_peek()' + '__skb_unlink()' are used.
>>   This behaviour was implemented before skbuff support.
>> 3) For SOCK_SEQPACKET it removes unneeded 'skb_pull()' call, because for
>>   this type of socket each skbuff is used only once: after removing it
>>   from socket's queue, it will be freed anyway.
> 
> thanks for the fixes, I would wait a few days to see if there are any
> comments and then I think you can send it on net without RFC.
> 
> @Bobby if you can take a look, your ack would be appreciated :-)
Ok, thanks for review. I'll wait for several days and also wait until
net-next will be opened. Then i'll resend this patchset with net-next

Thanks, Arseniy
> 
> Thanks,
> Stefano
>