From: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>
To: "Aurélien Aptel" <aaptel@suse.com>,
"longli@linuxonhyperv.com" <longli@linuxonhyperv.com>,
"Steve French" <sfrench@samba.org>,
"linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org>,
"samba-technical@lists.samba.org"
<samba-technical@lists.samba.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] cifs: Remove locking in smb2_verify_signature() when calculating SMB2/SMB3 signature on receiving packets
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 05:41:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BN8PR21MB1155DCB17C62EDCE529922ABCECC0@BN8PR21MB1155.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87d08zzbg6.fsf@suse.com>
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] cifs: Remove locking in smb2_verify_signature() when
>calculating SMB2/SMB3 signature on receiving packets
>
>longli@linuxonhyperv.com writes:
>> On the sending and receiving paths, CIFS uses the same cypto data
>> structures to calculate SMB2/SMB3 packet signatures. A lock on the
>> receiving path is necessary to control shared access to crypto data
>> structures. This lock degrades performance because it races with the
>sending path.
>>
>> Define separate crypto data structures for sending and receiving paths
>> and remove this lock.
>
>Something I've often wondered: why do we keep crypto state in the server
>structure instead of creating it as needed in the caller stack (thus avoiding the
>need for locks). AFAIK there's no state that need to be kept between
>signing/encrypting calls beside the access to keys. Is it that expensive to
>create/release?
My guess is that crypto_alloc_shash() is a heavy call?
>
>Cheers,
>--
>Aurélien Aptel / SUSE Labs Samba Team
>GPG: 1839 CB5F 9F5B FB9B AA97 8C99 03C8 A49B 521B D5D3 SUSE Software
>Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, DE
>GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah HRB 247165 (AG München)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-27 5:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-25 18:13 [PATCH] cifs: Remove locking in smb2_verify_signature() when calculating SMB2/SMB3 signature on receiving packets longli
2020-03-25 21:39 ` Pavel Shilovsky
2020-03-25 23:29 ` Long Li
2020-03-26 1:37 ` Steve French
2020-03-26 1:57 ` Long Li
2020-03-26 9:56 ` Aurélien Aptel
2020-03-27 5:41 ` Long Li [this message]
2020-03-27 11:05 ` Aurélien Aptel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=BN8PR21MB1155DCB17C62EDCE529922ABCECC0@BN8PR21MB1155.namprd21.prod.outlook.com \
--to=longli@microsoft.com \
--cc=aaptel@suse.com \
--cc=linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longli@linuxonhyperv.com \
--cc=samba-technical@lists.samba.org \
--cc=sfrench@samba.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).