netdev - Re: tun: Use netif_receive_skb instead of netif

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:	Wed, 19 May 2010 13:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, tgraf@...hat.com, nhorman@...hat.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: tun: Use netif_receive_skb instead of netif_rx

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 18:20:47 +1000

> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 10:09:42AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> 
>> 6) netif_rx() pro is that packet processing is done while stack usage is
>> guaranteed to be low (from process_backlog, using a special softirq
>> stack, instead of current stack)
>> 
>> After your patch, tun will use more stack. Is it safe on all contexts ?
> 
> Dave also raised this but I believe nothing changes with regards
> to the stack.  We currently call do_softirq which does not switch
> stacks.

do_softirq() _does_ switch stacks, it's a per-arch function that
does the stack switch and calls __do_softirq() on the softirq
stack.
--
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