| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:00:51 +0200 From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> To: Mitchell Erblich <erblichs@...thlink.net> Cc: James Courtier-Dutton <james.dutton@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: b44: Reset due to FIFO overflow. Le lundi 28 juin 2010 à 02:33 -0700, Mitchell Erblich a écrit : > > Why wouldn't the ability to recv frames after a Recv FIFO overflow > indicate that a reset is NOT required? > Do you have datasheets of all b44 chips ? I dont. > Thus, should't it be an indication of congestion if associated with a single > flow and either speed up (reduce latency to service) the recv side or > slow down the xmit side? I dont understand what you are saying. xmit is not the problem here. And driver is flow agnostic. Its well before network stack. Problem is we receive a spike of RX network frames (possibly UDP or some other RX only trafic), and chip raises an RX fifo overflow _error_ indication. Some hardware are buggy enough that such error indication is fatal and _require_ hardware reset. Thats life. I suspect b44 driver doing a full reset is not a random guess from driver author, but to avoid a complete NIC lockup. Refs: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7696 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216338 commit 5fc7d61aee1a7f7d3448f8fbccaa93371ebeecb0 -- 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