netdev - Re: e1000 driver and samba

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:	Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:13:44 -0400
From:	"L F" <lfabio.linux@...il.com>
To:	"Bruce Cole" <bacole@...il.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: e1000 driver and samba

On 9/20/07, Bruce Cole <bacole@...il.com> wrote:
> Yes, that *was* the common recommendation.  But recently I narrowed down the
> realtek performance problem most commonly seen with samba (but also applicable
> to other TCP applications), and I also narrowed down the fix as well.
>
> The current fix involves re-kicking the TX queue after it becomes stuck.
> Apparently it becomes stuck due to a contention problem between the driver and
> controller.  I suspect the root problem is the driver isn't properly locking
> the TX queue.  It might be worth checking if the queue locking problem exists
> in other net drivers as well.
Aha. This doesn't seem to be in mr. Romieu's patch above: should it go
in on top of that?
I ask because with the forementioned patch the newer integrated NICs
seem to be recognised correctly and preliminary testing shows no
disconnect issues, but performance is nothing to write home about (one
of these days I'll get into a rant about samba speed vs. ftp speed,
but this is not the time nor place).

> Reference:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg40384.html

> Bruce Cole

LF
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html