netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf 0/2] tcp_bpf: update the rmem scheduling for ingress redirection

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: <Zy2MbHoO9xNQj2pb@pop-os.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2024 19:58:36 -0800
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To: zijianzhang@...edance.com
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com, jakub@...udflare.com,
	davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, dsahern@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	cong.wang@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 0/2] tcp_bpf: update the rmem scheduling for ingress
 redirection

On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 12:57:40AM +0000, zijianzhang@...edance.com wrote:
> From: Zijian Zhang <zijianzhang@...edance.com>
> 
> We should do sk_rmem_schedule instead of sk_wmem_schedule in function
> bpf_tcp_ingress. We also need to update sk_rmem_alloc accordingly to
> account for the rmem.
> 

Is it possible to have a test case for this? I think it would be easier
to prove and convince people to accept these changes.

Thanks!