From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22C23C4727C for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 15:40:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA7F207F7 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 15:40:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="OgXqqs/i" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732414AbgJAPkv (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2020 11:40:51 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40704 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731885AbgJAPkv (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2020 11:40:51 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-x242.google.com (mail-lj1-x242.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::242]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2381C0613D0; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 08:40:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x242.google.com with SMTP id r24so5058538ljm.3; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 08:40:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kuMjPWKiD2oqELTx7IGcIvbf+zcqAAlUMunKUA7pXBM=; b=OgXqqs/if/KAcvhxEHGSGv/dlra1C3gr45obQlUiBKp1PDs8l0B1Q1lpgVusdfW643 AIkM6fDuqWwsLbMouYv+WgH75nJxxb183cuQE49mgKPG6YBkM8uelUYBp/jvP9NdCNF4 dOTJT25WtWcQeIs+oxvsYwZlQG09byGbip5OO54YfYapyeH6cYh6g24Ab8bTaWQJyMRV i6GrDLyzLKS3kGbgqvNWbmuVkOl5afe/NSzWdcLIlo4Y8Hj4WnCVhAnmRNLN+2SnAvYk J4OLYojD5tEDmBd1RgiPuLlcrARkv+cLSlGJssglkCEpc8n+BfW2Caz2laWPdW0LRvIP Z5og== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kuMjPWKiD2oqELTx7IGcIvbf+zcqAAlUMunKUA7pXBM=; b=luLdTH3Kue4Zc9fZmzd01lAUC888ISI+CBhgm4pLzCHBgE6dW6Rt+dMMxm+z1kxqzj ft+d2KvzTL9rBmsXMd85fxTSp8y0P11f6/iY1lwaq3/aEBM+d+3dsla4yoCth8v7q1Ji l1E+prHRC0Ee63h1pKZHnGswjDEiukZSMbE75G2Td4gaOX8QHUmqi3xfkTb4G9999jjj S47NZgplbhLIjfTeP7DTTLTZUBcfsdiKbKsWtlYCg9ypaFrgCIxQiLnVPBVnWfpo9cDs 3O5ctrslMC0dfI+BQzIbXMZLyk4eqes4v6zCeh6mLv6M0iBy3lOy1wqrhhxJFJKyluXu CCfQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ZBt3JhbsjaEEkQ28VX81CmASUkvYTHlaerhKtMcntl516iuVF v6TV2qeYgM2iwe+S6QoaXWp83mB6V2oAISAfpy0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxez8ZO6JFpsIPGzov/HGpjjWEmromf4jskS1png2k/hO796iLcslAfOAAVwjcaxhobFC2WuAC4anO4T5abL0E= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:808f:: with SMTP id i15mr2333354ljg.51.1601566848933; Thu, 01 Oct 2020 08:40:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5e248485713d2470d97f36ad67c9b3ceedfc2b3f.1601478613.git.lorenzo@kernel.org> <20200930191121.jm62rlopekegbjx5@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20201001150535.GE13449@lore-desk> In-Reply-To: <20201001150535.GE13449@lore-desk> From: Alexei Starovoitov Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 08:40:36 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 06/12] bpf: helpers: add multibuffer support To: Lorenzo Bianconi Cc: Network Development , bpf , "David S. Miller" , sameehj@amazon.com, Jakub Kicinski , John Fastabend , Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , shayagr@amazon.com, Jesper Dangaard Brouer , Eelco Chaudron , Lorenzo Bianconi , David Ahern Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 8:05 AM Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 05:41:57PM +0200, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > Hi Alexei, > > > > From: Sameeh Jubran > > > > > > The implementation is based on this [0] draft by Jesper D. Brouer. > > > > > > Provided two new helpers: > > > > > > * bpf_xdp_get_frag_count() > > > * bpf_xdp_get_frags_total_size() > > > > > > + * int bpf_xdp_get_frag_count(struct xdp_buff *xdp_md) > > > + * Description > > > + * Get the number of fragments for a given xdp multi-buffer. > > > + * Return > > > + * The number of fragments > > > + * > > > + * int bpf_xdp_get_frags_total_size(struct xdp_buff *xdp_md) > > > + * Description > > > + * Get the total size of fragments for a given xdp multi-buffer. > > > + * Return > > > + * The total size of fragments for a given xdp multi-buffer. > > > */ > > > #define __BPF_FUNC_MAPPER(FN) \ > > > FN(unspec), \ > > > @@ -3737,6 +3749,8 @@ union bpf_attr { > > > FN(inode_storage_delete), \ > > > FN(d_path), \ > > > FN(copy_from_user), \ > > > + FN(xdp_get_frag_count), \ > > > + FN(xdp_get_frags_total_size), \ > > > /* */ > > > > Please route the set via bpf-next otherwise merge conflicts will be severe. > > ack, fine > > in bpf-next the following two commits (available in net-next) are currently missing: > - 632bb64f126a: net: mvneta: try to use in-irq pp cache in mvneta_txq_bufs_free > - 879456bedbe5: net: mvneta: avoid possible cache misses in mvneta_rx_swbm > > is it ok to rebase bpf-next ontop of net-next in order to post all the series > in bpf-next? Or do you prefer to post mvneta patches in net-next and bpf > related changes in bpf-next when it will rebased ontop of net-next? bpf-next will receive these patches later today, so I prefer the whole thing on top of bpf-next at that time.