netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v7 0/6] net/smc: Introduce smc

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: <2ae65126-73a3-4c18-bef5-d4067c727cf5@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 12:37:55 +0100
From: Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>
To: "D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>, jaka@...ux.ibm.com
Cc: kgraul@...ux.ibm.com, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
        andrii@...nel.org, martin.lau@...ux.dev, pabeni@...hat.com,
        song@...nel.org, sdf@...gle.com, haoluo@...gle.com, yhs@...com,
        edumazet@...gle.com, john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
        jolsa@...nel.org, guwen@...ux.alibaba.com, kuba@...nel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v7 0/6] net/smc: Introduce smc_ops



On 14.02.25 10:22, D. Wythe wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 09:59:36AM +0800, D. Wythe wrote:
>> This patch aims to introduce BPF injection capabilities for SMC and
>> includes a self-test to ensure code stability.
>>
>> Since the SMC protocol isn't ideal for every situation, especially
>> short-lived ones, most applications can't guarantee the absence of
>> such scenarios. Consequently, applications may need specific strategies
>> to decide whether to use SMC. For example, an application might limit SMC
>> usage to certain IP addresses or ports.
>>
>> To maintain the principle of transparent replacement, we want applications
>> to remain unaffected even if they need specific SMC strategies. In other
>> words, they should not require recompilation of their code.
>>
>> Additionally, we need to ensure the scalability of strategy implementation.
>> While using socket options or sysctl might be straightforward, it could
>> complicate future expansions.
>>
>> Fortunately, BPF addresses these concerns effectively. Users can write
>> their own strategies in eBPF to determine whether to use SMC, and they can
>> easily modify those strategies in the future.
> 
> Hi smc folks, @Wenjia @Ian
> 
> Is there any feedback regarding this patches ? This series of code has
> gone through multiple rounds of community reviews. However, the parts
> related to SMC, including the new sysctl and ops name, really needs
> your input and acknowledgment.
> 
> Additionally, this series includes a bug fix for SMC, which is easily
> reproducible in the BPF CI tests.
> 
> Thanks,
> D. Wythe
> 
Hi D.Wythe,

Thanks for the reminder! I have a few higher-priority tasks to handle 
first, but I’ll get back to you as soon as I can—hopefully next week.

Thanks,
Wenjia