Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next V2 3/3] tap: XDP support | From | Jason Wang <> | Date | Tue, 15 Aug 2017 12:55:37 +0800 |
| |
On 2017年08月14日 16:43, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 08/11/2017 01:41 PM, Jason Wang wrote: >> This patch tries to implement XDP for tun. The implementation was >> split into two parts: > [...] >> @@ -1402,6 +1521,22 @@ static ssize_t tun_get_user(struct tun_struct >> *tun, struct tun_file *tfile, >> skb_reset_network_header(skb); >> skb_probe_transport_header(skb, 0); >> >> + if (generic_xdp) { >> + struct bpf_prog *xdp_prog; >> + int ret; >> + >> + rcu_read_lock(); >> + xdp_prog = rcu_dereference(tun->xdp_prog); > > The name generic_xdp is a bit confusing in this context given this > is 'native' XDP, perhaps above if (generic_xdp) should have a comment > explaining semantics for tun and how it relates to actual generic xdp > that sits at dev->xdp_prog, and gets run from netif_rx_ni(). Or just > name the bool xdp_handle_gso with a comment that we let the generic > XDP infrastructure deal with non-linear skbs instead of having to > re-implement the do_xdp_generic() internals, plus a statement that > the actual generic XDP comes a bit later in the path. That would at > least make it more obvious to read, imho.
Ok, since non gso packet (e.g jumbo packet) may go this way too, something like "xdp_handle_skb" is better. Will send a patch.
Thanks
> >> + if (xdp_prog) { >> + ret = do_xdp_generic(xdp_prog, skb); >> + if (ret != XDP_PASS) { >> + rcu_read_unlock(); >> + return total_len; >> + } >> + } >> + rcu_read_unlock(); >> + } >> + >> rxhash = __skb_get_hash_symmetric(skb); >> #ifndef CONFIG_4KSTACKS >> tun_rx_batched(tun, tfile, skb, more); >> >
| |