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: <ZuSKofgZbfn_n8tb@LQ3V64L9R2.homenet.telecomitalia.it>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 20:55:29 +0200
From: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, mkarsten@...terloo.ca, kuba@...nel.org,
	skhawaja@...gle.com, sdf@...ichev.me, bjorn@...osinc.com,
	amritha.nambiar@...el.com, sridhar.samudrala@...el.com,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
	"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next v3 5/9] net: napi: Add napi_config

On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 10:42:37AM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 09/12, Joe Damato wrote:

[...]

> > @@ -6505,12 +6517,13 @@ static void napi_hash_add(struct napi_struct *napi)
> >  		if (unlikely(++napi_gen_id < MIN_NAPI_ID))
> >  			napi_gen_id = MIN_NAPI_ID;
> >  	} while (napi_by_id(napi_gen_id));
> 
> [..]
> 
> > -	napi->napi_id = napi_gen_id;
> > -
> > -	hlist_add_head_rcu(&napi->napi_hash_node,
> > -			   &napi_hash[napi->napi_id % HASH_SIZE(napi_hash)]);
> >  
> >  	spin_unlock(&napi_hash_lock);
> > +
> > +	napi_hash_add_with_id(napi, napi_gen_id);
> 
> nit: it is very unlikely that napi_gen_id is gonna wrap around after the
> spin_unlock above, but maybe it's safer to have the following?
> 
> static void __napi_hash_add_with_id(struct napi_struct *napi, unsigned int napi_id)
> {
> 	napi->napi_id = napi_id;
> 	hlist_add_head_rcu(&napi->napi_hash_node,
> 			   &napi_hash[napi->napi_id % HASH_SIZE(napi_hash)]);
> }
> 
> static void napi_hash_add_with_id(struct napi_struct *napi, unsigned int napi_id)
> {
> 	spin_lock(&napi_hash_lock);
> 	__napi_hash_add_with_id(...);
> 	spin_unlock(&napi_hash_lock);
> }
> 
> And use __napi_hash_add_with_id here before spin_unlock?

Thanks for taking a look.

Sure, that seems reasonable. I can add that for the rfcv4.

I'll probably hold off on posting the rfcv4 until either after LPC
and/or after I have some time to debug the mlx5/page_pool thing.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ