From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1757858Ab3JCExU (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 3 Oct 2013 00:53:20 -0400
Received: from mail-pb0-f42.google.com ([209.85.160.42]:48367 "EHLO
	mail-pb0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1756421Ab3JCExR (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 3 Oct 2013 00:53:17 -0400
Message-ID: <1380775982.19002.145.camel@edumazet-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] fix unsafe set_memory_rw from softirq
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
        Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 21:53:02 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CAMEtUux5Fvffdg1G-aAe4XN8hJ3oUZyD2Gs3sqcwDdGf9VQ5fw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1380772231-3566-1-git-send-email-ast@plumgrid.com>
	 <1380774230.19002.135.camel@edumazet-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
	 <CAMEtUux5Fvffdg1G-aAe4XN8hJ3oUZyD2Gs3sqcwDdGf9VQ5fw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 21:44 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:

> I think ifdef config_x86 is a bit ugly inside struct sk_filter, but
> don't mind whichever way.

Its not fair to make sk_filter bigger, because it means that simple (non
JIT) filter might need an extra cache line.

You could presumably use the following layout instead :

struct sk_filter
{
        atomic_t                refcnt;
        struct rcu_head         rcu;
	struct work_struct      work;

        unsigned int            len ____cacheline_aligned;    /* Number of filter blocks */
        unsigned int            (*bpf_func)(const struct sk_buff *skb,
                                            const struct sock_filter *filter);
        struct sock_filter      insns[0];
};