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, 19 Aug 2008 15:08:57 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jussi.kivilinna@...et.fi,
	jarkao2@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: qdisc_enqueue, NET_XMIT_SUCCESS and kfree_skb

Herbert Xu wrote:
> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>> In fact, as I look at how TBF and NETEM want to use ->requeue() they
>> could just the same implement it using my suggested alternative for
>> ->requeue() which is just an SKB list ala gso_list hung off of the
>> qdisc.
> 
> For TBF at least its requeue is actually a bit more sophisticated.
> For example, if you hang a prio qdisc off a TBF, then when the
> packet is requeued into the prio, the next time TBF dequeues it,
> it may get a different packet (of a higher priority).
> 
> If you stick it to a list without requeueing, then packets of a
> higher priority won't be able to jump the queue anymore.
> 
> It might be possible to rewrite TBF to not use requeueing, after
> all HTB does it all without requeueing.  However as it stands,
> TBF does need it.
> 
> I haven't followed this thread closely so what is the main problem
> with requeueing (apart from being abused by things like LLTX drivers
> and/or NETEM, nothing other than qdiscs like TBF should use it)?
> 
> Another possibility would to replace requeue by a peek+force_dequeue
> interface, where you can peek at the next packet, and you could then
> dequeue that particular packet if you're satisfied.

That would be fine for TBF since it only needs to check whether
the current packet exceeds the limit and reschedule otherwise.
HFSC OTOH really needs to know the length of the next packet for
calculating the deadline.
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists