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: Sun, 29 Oct 2023 14:48:28 +0200
From: Gal Pressman <>
To: Ahmed Zaki <>, Jakub Kicinski <>,
 Alexander H Duyck <>
 Wojciech Drewek <>,,,,,,,,,
 Jacob Keller <>,,,
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v4 1/6] net: ethtool: allow
 symmetric-xor RSS hash for any flow type

On 29/10/2023 14:42, Ahmed Zaki wrote:
> On 2023-10-29 06:25, Gal Pressman wrote:
>> On 21/10/2023 3:00, Ahmed Zaki wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-20 17:49, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 17:14:11 -0600 Ahmed Zaki wrote:
>>>>> I replied to that here:
>>>>> I am kind of confused now so please bear with me. ethtool either sends
>>>>> "ethtool_rxfh" or "ethtool_rxnfc". AFAIK "ethtool_rxfh" is the
>>>>> interface
>>>>> for "ethtool -X" which is used to set the RSS algorithm. But we
>>>>> kind of
>>>>> agreed to go with "ethtool -U|-N" for symmetric-xor, and that uses
>>>>> "ethtool_rxnfc" (as implemented in this series).
>>>> I have no strong preference. Sounds like Alex prefers to keep it closer
>>>> to algo, which is "ethtool_rxfh".
>>>>> Do you mean use "ethtool_rxfh" instead of "ethtool_rxnfc"? how would
>>>>> that work on the ethtool user interface?
>>>> I don't know what you're asking of us. If you find the code to
>>>> confusing
>>>> maybe someone at Intel can help you :|
>>> The code is straightforward. I am confused by the requirements: don't
>>> add a new algorithm but use "ethtool_rxfh".
>>> I'll see if I can get more help, may be I am missing something.
>> What was the decision here?
>> Is this going to be exposed through ethtool -N or -X?
> I am working on a new version that uses "ethtool_rxfh" to set the
> symmetric-xor. The user will set per-device via:
> ethtool -X eth0 hfunc toeplitz symmetric-xor
> then specify the per-flow type RSS fields as usual:
> ethtool -N|-U eth0 rx-flow-hash <flow_type> s|d|f|n
> The downside is that all flow-types will have to be either symmetric or
> asymmetric.

Why are we making the interface less flexible than it can be with -N?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists