Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1312329
| From | Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] crypto: af_alg - add async support to algif_aead |
| Date | 2016-01-19 16:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qSGoi-1fW-25@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qRiem-23s-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <qRX7P-43J-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <qSjUK-2vA-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <qSsv0-8sj-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 01/18/2016 04:34 PM, Herbert Xu wrote: >> My understanding is that the sock_kmalloc is mainly used for allocations >> > of the user provided data, because it keeps tracks of how much memory >> > is allocated by a socket, and makes sure that is will not exceed the >> > sysctl_optmem_max limit. Usually the internal structures, with fixed >> > size are allocated simply with kmalloc. I don't think that using >> > sock_kmalloc will give us any benefit here. > If there is only ever one of them per-socket then kmalloc is fine, > otherwise you should use sock_kmalloc. There is one per request. There can be a few of them at a given time. We have the same thing in skcipher and we use kmalloc there. > >> I agree that they are very similar, but I found it much easier to debug >> > when they are separate functions. I would prefer to keep them separate. >> > They are also separate in algif_skcipher. It makes it also easier to >> > read and understand. > I too would prefer a common function. However we can do this > later if we wish. > lets do this later then. > >> > The inflight ctr is incremented only if an asynchronous request has been >> > successfully en-queued for processing. If a user forges to call recvmsg >> > then the function that increments it won't be even called. >> > >From the other hand we don't want to give the option to interrupt the >> > wait, because in a case, when we do have request being processed by some >> > hardware, and the user kills the process, causing the socket to be >> > freed, then we will get an Oops in the callback. > This should be replaced with a sock_hold. Ok, I will try sock_hold. Thanks, -- TS
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] crypto: af_alg - add async support to algif_aead Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@intel.com> - 2016-01-15 20:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] crypto: af_alg - add async support to algif_aead Stephan Mueller <smueller@chronox.de> - 2016-01-17 16:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH] crypto: af_alg - add async support to algif_aead Tadeusz Struk <tstruk@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 16:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] crypto: af_alg - add async support to algif_aead Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> - 2016-01-19 01:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] crypto: af_alg - add async support to algif_aead Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@intel.com> - 2016-01-19 16:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] crypto: af_alg - add async support to algif_aead Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@intel.com> - 2016-01-20 21:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] crypto: af_alg - add async support to algif_aead Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> - 2016-01-21 06:10 +0100
csiph-web