From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F89C37F758 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2026 11:31:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.156 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774265488; cv=none; b=Hv6fIn7JObOH9KhTOSDK2eAKUI1iEe6PgnlnYGXGtCZAt8hLSXWNnvbX/CfRjMgCM1EtiO1MAyNdxuJJhceALpSpF8G9ws3kx2dT+o/u5Kx+cJ5ffrQq0onqTXjKMERWtWp0au5PovJdeUJCLmWl9djR7a3voA6fUmgbduStZAQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774265488; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UJcEnc5AWCHo1mHbu9Gr+oY1HftJroueaHxJIUNHybA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=MV6opgyMPuHzEjorWaCGvsqpmP9JlF8iBUf4sHbGqP71VPzdABlkWb4gUV7Zovafg1A1lDpJcvjMdtZDjy3fFJowLU9PNtm3VVkLAgFBiKvVJ/PXHJ+hZe4/3eiw5Qb4BvESDmz3efSVW+4tY7vLir9z+yUDOfzs9yuqHwM6MKA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=queasysnail.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=queasysnail.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=queasysnail.net header.i=@queasysnail.net header.b=htFl5Xkc; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=1kD77AOa; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.156 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=queasysnail.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=queasysnail.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=queasysnail.net header.i=@queasysnail.net header.b="htFl5Xkc"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="1kD77AOa" Received: from phl-compute-06.internal (phl-compute-06.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FD321400082; Mon, 23 Mar 2026 07:31:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-03 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-06.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 23 Mar 2026 07:31:25 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=queasysnail.net; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1774265485; x= 1774351885; bh=vRsmg8gaC0t46C47uqnzqJL9EPThq2kwCz/1WO6apZs=; b=h tFl5XkcYnDjsA0RfCekZL84JZO62jgzanvxAdZV4gb/Y5+Jadcqi0Jyf1atsPpmI L8XUNYu2o5ltjnAQy9oz8eTRPyiXn/1MR9Zo8TQTNylo34a29ClSmmIhEJfplkkH yLZ/+wXkW+6RhDR6pudEEfnPsMGrraJnkvndtASQq//R1ai8Qo4NoCn68Aqb+j93 3gMzEBAC3+Jk2xQc0eIDUZjyy7IuL2pdGf1Gl8IgbS5TFsAI/KyxiQQibDb8QA0k bmHA9uJmBecKI34vr7ey8lJobuRbVfgRL2+dBkx3sCTH5zsk9ZEsdJ/hM/+W7WBD h+qSsT1z3/yKDFsIIRt3w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1774265485; x=1774351885; bh=vRsmg8gaC0t46C47uqnzqJL9EPThq2kwCz/ 1WO6apZs=; b=1kD77AOaOInma6GRlt+l9GZFMovJEu7ppKM5Ad0pPxpFm0yGEw3 SJJkaaybW03YL2t2+U1/VMvS1Uect+0bxfvuh482iUTFhizUKHim8sQUzv+dOuw7 N8v2MDgbbZdc+uMI2q1TSLutFNar5KYdRI3ON5emkaqkg1MO6719/6tytM/nUUeN hAyd9yXsTn4haroMRMl4Otpi3KlN1atiXjcrxfdzPD9h/cFdso0zvk1eCAzgNKna WOpBYmVB9hVMvJuMZ4xO12PU2mZRxLwh07ovnLNlFuWwDOH11s7nmi/r/UXCcYr2 lWkoBMJT4ojmhxIYgtFBxv5T37UA3Pv7Rfw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefgedrtddtgdefudekiedtucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceu rghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujf gurhepfffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtjeenucfhrhhomhepufgrsghrihhn rgcuffhusghrohgtrgcuoehsugesqhhuvggrshihshhnrghilhdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrf grthhtvghrnhepuefhhfffgfffhfefueeiudegtdefhfekgeetheegheeifffguedvueff fefgudffnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh epshgusehquhgvrghshihsnhgrihhlrdhnvghtpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeejpdhmohgu vgepshhmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopegtvghlsehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtph htthhopehjohhhnhdrfhgrshhtrggsvghnugesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthho pehkuhgsrgeskhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepnhgvthguvghvsehvghgvrh drkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepkhgvrhhnvghlqdhtlhhsqdhhrghnughs hhgrkhgvsehlihhsthhsrdhlihhnuhigrdguvghvpdhrtghpthhtoheptghhuhgtkhdrlh gvvhgvrhesohhrrggtlhgvrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohephhgrrhgvsehsuhhsvgdruggv X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i934648bf:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 23 Mar 2026 07:31:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 12:31:22 +0100 From: Sabrina Dubroca To: Chuck Lever Cc: john.fastabend@gmail.com, kuba@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-tls-handshake@lists.linux.dev, Chuck Lever , Hannes Reinecke Subject: Re: [PATCH PATCH net-next v4 7/8] tls: Restructure tls_sw_read_sock() into submit/deliver phases Message-ID: References: <20260317-tls-read-sock-v4-0-ab1086ec600f@oracle.com> <20260317-tls-read-sock-v4-7-ab1086ec600f@oracle.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260317-tls-read-sock-v4-7-ab1086ec600f@oracle.com> 2026-03-17, 11:04:20 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > From: Chuck Lever > > Pipelining multiple AEAD operations requires separating decryption > from delivery so that several records can be submitted before any > are passed to the read_actor callback. The main loop in > tls_sw_read_sock() is split into two explicit phases: a submit > phase that decrypts one record onto ctx->rx_list, and a deliver > phase that drains rx_list and passes each cleartext skb to the > read_actor callback. > > With a single record per submit phase, behavior is identical to the > previous code. A subsequent patch will extend the submit phase to > pipeline multiple AEAD operations. > > Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke > Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever > --- > net/tls/tls_sw.c | 70 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------- > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/tls/tls_sw.c b/net/tls/tls_sw.c > index 5b154afbd7ac2ddd51b46d8d6bef0a7a41f0a841..5ae7e0c026e4437fe442c3a77b0a6d9623816ce1 100644 > --- a/net/tls/tls_sw.c > +++ b/net/tls/tls_sw.c > @@ -2346,8 +2346,8 @@ int tls_sw_read_sock(struct sock *sk, read_descriptor_t *desc, > struct tls_context *tls_ctx = tls_get_ctx(sk); > struct tls_sw_context_rx *ctx = tls_sw_ctx_rx(tls_ctx); > struct tls_prot_info *prot = &tls_ctx->prot_info; > - struct strp_msg *rxm = NULL; > struct sk_buff *skb = NULL; > + struct strp_msg *rxm; nit: networking tries to follow the "reverse xmas tree" ordering (a bit broken in ktls because of context structs). [or just leave this alone because setting it to NULL doesn't hurt?] [...] > + /* Phase 2: Deliver -- drain rx_list to read_actor */ > + while ((skb = __skb_dequeue(&ctx->rx_list)) != NULL) { > rxm = strp_msg(skb); > tlm = tls_msg(skb); > - decrypted += rxm->full_len; > [...] > + copied += used; > + if (used < rxm->full_len) { > + rxm->offset += used; > + rxm->full_len -= used; > + if (!desc->count) > + goto read_sock_requeue; > + } else { > + consume_skb(skb); > + skb = NULL; > + } > } > + /* Drain all of rx_list before honoring !desc->count */ > + if (!desc->count) > + break; I'm not really familiar with the read_sock users, why is it ok to ignore desc->count reaching 0 while we're in the rx_list loop? > } -- Sabrina