netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] Change BPF_TEST_RUN use the system page pool for live XDP frames

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: <c888b60a-0be5-8e7c-0fa0-8039e691406a@iogearbox.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 13:35:41 +0100
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Cc: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] Change BPF_TEST_RUN use the system page pool
 for live XDP frames

On 2/20/24 12:23 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> writes:
>> On 2/19/24 7:52 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>>> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Now that we have a system-wide page pool, we can use that for the live
>>>> frame mode of BPF_TEST_RUN (used by the XDP traffic generator), and
>>>> avoid the cost of creating a separate page pool instance for each
>>>> syscall invocation. See the individual patches for more details.
>>>>
>>>> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen (3):
>>>>     net: Register system page pool as an XDP memory model
>>>>     bpf: test_run: Use system page pool for XDP live frame mode
>>>>     bpf: test_run: Fix cacheline alignment of live XDP frame data
>>>>       structures
>>>>
>>>>    include/linux/netdevice.h |   1 +
>>>>    net/bpf/test_run.c        | 138 +++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>>>>    net/core/dev.c            |  13 +++-
>>>>    3 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> Hi maintainers
>>>
>>> This series is targeting net-next, but it's listed as delegate:bpf in
>>> patchwork[0]; is that a mistake? Do I need to do anything more to nudge it
>>> along?
>>
>> I moved it over to netdev, it would be good next time if there are dependencies
>> which are in net-next but not yet bpf-next to clearly state them given from this
>> series the majority touches the bpf test infra code.
> 
> Right, I thought that was what I was doing by targeting them at net-next
> (in the subject). What's the proper way to do this, then, just noting it
> in the cover letter? :)

An explicit lore link to the series this depends on would be best.

Thanks,
Daniel