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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20230406075908.5ebcb5a0@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 07:59:08 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Liang Chen <liangchen.linux@...il.com> Cc: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>, hawk@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] skbuff: Fix a race between coalescing and releasing SKBs On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 19:54:23 +0800 Liang Chen wrote: > > > Same feeling on my side. > > > I prefer not trying to merge mixed pp_recycle skbs "just because we > > > could" at the expense > > > of adding more code in a fast path. > > > > +1 here. The intention of recycling was to affect the normal path as > > less as possible. On top of that, we've some amount of race > > conditions over the years, trying to squeeze more performance with > > similar tricks. I'd much rather be safe here, since recycling by > > itself is a great performance boost > > Sorry, I didn't check my inbox before sending out the v2 patch. I can discard v2 from patchwork, let's continue the conversation here. > Yeah, It is a bit complicated as we expected. The patch is sent out. > Please take a look to see if it is the way to go, or We should stay > with the current patch for simplicity reasons. Thanks! Sounds like you know what Eric and Ilias agreed with, I'm a bit confused.. are we basically going back to v1? (hopefully with coding style fixed)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists