netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 9/9] iov_iter: Add benchmarking kunit tests for UBUF/IOVEC

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: <3585404.1694781366@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 13:36:06 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
    Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
    Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, "Christoph
 Hellwig" <hch@....de>,
    Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
    "Matthew
 Wilcox" <willy@...radead.org>,
    Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
    David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
    "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
    "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
    "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
    "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
    "linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
    "kunit-dev@...glegroups.com" <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
    "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
    Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
    Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
    "David
 Hildenbrand" <david@...hat.com>,
    John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 9/9] iov_iter: Add benchmarking kunit tests for UBUF/IOVEC

David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> wrote:

> I was thinking of import_iovec() - or whatever its current
> name is.

That doesn't actually access the buffer described by the iovec[].

> That really needs a single structure that contains the iov_iter
> and the cache[] (which the caller pretty much always allocates
> in the same place).

cache[]?

> Fiddling with that is ok until you find what io_uring does.
> Then it all gets entirely horrid.

That statement sounds like back-of-the-OLS-T-shirt material ;-)

David