netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: add add indirect call wrapper in skb_release_head

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: <CANn89iLVxzmJrxhyEXYp26V9SZy5D66PS4ywf=vZ7piK99Hdww@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 06:01:40 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, 
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, 
	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, 
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>, 
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: add add indirect call wrapper in skb_release_head_state()

On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 5:54 AM Alexander Lobakin
<aleksander.lobakin@...el.com> wrote:

> You asked *me* to show the difference, in the orig discussion there's a
> patch, there are tests and there is difference... :D

I am afraid I have not seen this.

The only thing I found was :

<quote>
Not sure, but maybe we could add generic XSk skb destructor here as
well? Or it's not that important as generic XSk is not the best way to
use XDP sockets?

Maciej, what do you think?
</quote>

No numbers.




>
> >
> > I can drop this patch instead, and keep it in Google kernels, (we had
> > TCP support for years)
>
> Ok, enough, leave this one as it is, we'll send the XSk bit ourselves.
>
> >
> > Or... you can send a patch on top of it later.
>
> Re "my Signed-off-by means I have strong confidence" -- sometimes we
> also have Tested-by from other folks and it's never been a problem,
> hey we're the community.
>
> Thanks,
> Olek