netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 7/9] xsk: support batch xmit main logic

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: <aPt__0JeH9lW-1yd@horms.kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 14:32:47 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, bjorn@...nel.org, magnus.karlsson@...el.com,
	maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com, jonathan.lemon@...il.com,
	sdf@...ichev.me, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
	hawk@...nel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com, joe@...a.to,
	willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 7/9] xsk: support batch xmit main logic

On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 09:12:07PM +0800, Jason Xing wrote:
> From: Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
> 
> This function __xsk_generic_xmit_batch() is the core function in batches
> xmit, implement a batch version of __xsk_generic_xmit().
> 
> The whole logic is divided into sections:
> 1. check if we have enough available slots in tx ring and completion
>    ring.
> 2. read descriptors from tx ring into pool->tx_descs in batches
> 3. reserve enough slots in completion ring to avoid backpressure
> 4. allocate and build skbs in batches
> 5. send all the possible packets in batches at one time
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>

Hi Jason,

__xsk_generic_xmit_batch is defined in this patch, but not used
until the next one. Which results in a transient warning when
building with W=1.

Perhaps it's just as well to squash this patch into the following patch?

...