| 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: Sun, 12 Apr 2015 23:01:29 -0400 (EDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: eric.dumazet@...il.com Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net] tcp/dccp: do not block bh too long in inet_twdr_twkill_work() From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2015 18:52:37 -0700 > On Sun, 2015-04-12 at 21:04 -0400, David Miller wrote: >> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> >> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 04:19:07 -0700 >> >> > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> >> > >> > I have seen inet_twdr_twkill_work() blocking softirq for >> > periods up to 1.5 seconds, depending on number of timewait sockets. >> > >> > This is an unacceptable source of latency. >> > >> > Note that inet_twdr_do_twkill_work() releases death_lock spinlock >> > for every tw handled, but does not take care of bh enabling. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> >> >> I think it makes sense to use local_softirq_pending() here rather >> than flip the lock unconditionally. > > I thought about that, but this meant having to test 2 conditions. > > Not sure we need this patch anyway, if we merge the 'tcp/dccp: get rid > of central timewait timer' in 4.1 > > Its not like it is a new bug ... Yeah, since 4.0 is out already, probably just pass on this patch. -- 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