netdev - Re: [PATCH] e1000: save skb counts in TX to avoid cache misses

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 14 Jun 2012 15:30:07 -0700
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Roman Kagan <rkagan@...allels.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
	"tarbal@...il.com" <tarbal@...il.com>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	"jesse.brandeburg@...el.com" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	"bruce.w.allan@...el.com" <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>,
	"carolyn.wyborny@...el.com" <carolyn.wyborny@...el.com>,
	"donald.c.skidmore@...el.com" <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>,
	"gregory.v.rose@...el.com" <gregory.v.rose@...el.com>,
	"peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
	"alexander.h.duyck@...el.com" <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
	"john.ronciak@...el.com" <john.ronciak@...el.com>,
	"dnelson@...hat.com" <dnelson@...hat.com>,
	"e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e1000: save skb counts in TX to avoid cache misses

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 03:12:17PM +0400, Roman Kagan wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 11:37 +0400, Roman Kagan wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 06:15 +0400, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 02:43:58PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> > > > From: Jeff Kirsher <tarbal@...il.com>
> > > > Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:38:17 -0700
> > > > 
> > > > > Thanks! I have applied the patch to my queue
> > > > 
> > > > Why?
> > > > 
> > > > My impression is that this is a patch already in the tree, and it's
> > > > being submitted for -stable but such minor performance hacks are
> > > > absolutely not appropriate for -stable submission.
> > > 
> > > The patch description says it is fixing reported oopses,
> > 
> > Exactly.
> > 
> > > but the Subject: isn't all that helpful there.
> > 
> > Well I just preserved the original subject from the upstream commit.
> > Want me to resubmit with a more alarming one?
> > 
> > > So which is this?  Should I accept it for a stable release or not?
> > 
> > IMO yes ;)
> 
> What came out of this discussion?  Should I resubmit with a different
> subject, or the original one is good enough?
> 
> The patch resolves a real oops; we've seen it multiple times when
> running Ubuntu-11.10 in virtual machines.  Upstream and RHEL have the
> fix since long.  Ubuntu is waiting for 3.0-stable to merge it
> (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1009545).

That's pretty funny that Ubuntu is letting me be the gatekeeper of fixes
to get to their customers, there's just so much wrong in that it's sad.

Anyway, I've queued it up for the next 3.0-stable release.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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