linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH for-2.6.35] virtio

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 15 Jun 2010 13:53:29 +0930
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	Sridhar Samudrala <sri@...ibm.com>,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>, Shirley Ma <xma@...ibm.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-2.6.35] virtio_net: fix oom handling on tx

On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 04:33:43 am Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:46:53AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > It makes more sense to have the device increment tx_droppped, 
> > and return NETDEV_TX_OK. Skip the message (or make it a pr_debug()). 
> > Network devices do not guarantee packet delivery, and if out of
> > resources then holding more data in the
> > queue is going to hurt not help the situation.

Yes, actually oom should be a ratelimited message and TX_OK, the other
case is a "should never happen" logic bug which warrants an error and
I don't care what it returns (whatever's easiest).

Please fix both at once since you're touching it.

Thanks,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/