netdev - [RFC] netpoll: Is it ok to share a single napi from several devs ?

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:	Mon, 30 Aug 2010 21:59:16 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, shemminger@...tta.com,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC] netpoll: Is it ok to share a single napi from several devs ?

So everybody jumped on GRO, while my concern was more the napi->dev
thing.

I pointed to gro because the commit was about gro, but gro was fine
IMHO.

Are we sure netpoll is ok ?

If a napi is shared by several net_device, should'nt we change
netpoll_poll_lock() ?

static inline void *netpoll_poll_lock(struct napi_struct *napi)
{
        struct net_device *dev = napi->dev;

        if (dev && dev->npinfo) {
                spin_lock(&napi->poll_lock);
                napi->poll_owner = smp_processor_id();
                return napi;
        }
        return NULL;
}

---->

static inline void *netpoll_poll_lock(struct napi_struct *napi)
{
        if (atomic_read(&napi->poll_count)) {
                spin_lock(&napi->poll_lock);
                napi->poll_owner = smp_processor_id();
                return napi;
        }
        return NULL;
}



--
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