netdev - Re: [PATCH v28 01/20] net: Introduce direct data placement tcp offload

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: <253v7paxv1t.fsf@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2025 14:54:54 +0300
From: Aurelien Aptel <aaptel@...dia.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 sagi@...mberg.me, hch@....de, kbusch@...nel.org, axboe@...com,
 chaitanyak@...dia.com, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, Boris
 Pismenny <borisp@...dia.com>, aurelien.aptel@...il.com, smalin@...dia.com,
 malin1024@...il.com, ogerlitz@...dia.com, yorayz@...dia.com,
 galshalom@...dia.com, mgurtovoy@...dia.com, tariqt@...dia.com,
 gus@...labora.com, pabeni@...hat.com, dsahern@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org,
 jacob.e.keller@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v28 01/20] net: Introduce direct data placement tcp offload

Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> writes:
> Adding one bit in all skbs for such a narrow case is not very convincing to me.
>
> I would prefer a disable/enable bit in the receiving socket, or a
> global static key.

We can move the bit to the socket, within the sock_read_rx cacheline group:


--- a/include/net/sock.h                          
+++ b/include/net/sock.h                          
@@ -420,7 +420,7 @@ struct sock {                 
 #endif                                           
        u8                      sk_userlocks;     
        int                     sk_rcvbuf;        
-                                                 
+       bool                    sk_no_condense;   
        struct sk_filter __rcu  *sk_filter;       
        union {                                   
                struct socket_wq __rcu  *sk_wq;


And then check for it in skb_condense().
We are still evaluating it but it looks fine for us.
Would that work for you?

Thanks