| 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: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 05:04:20 +0000 From: Noam Camus <noamc@...hip.com> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com" <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>, "vgupta@...opsys.com" <vgupta@...opsys.com>, Tal Zilcer <talz@...hip.com> Subject: RE: [v1 0/6] *** nps_enet fixups *** From: David Miller [mailto:davem@...emloft.net] Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 8:36 PM > You should not move TX completion out of NAPI handling, NAPI poll is exactly where it belongs. > > If you handle it in hardware interrupt context you have to use > dev_kfree_skb_irq() which defers the operation to software interrupt context anyways and is thus expensive. > Whereas if you keep TX completion in your NAPI handler the kfree is handled synchronously and efficiently, as well as making SKB's potentially available for RX reclaim. I followed "Hardware Architecture" section from: http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/networking/napi and came up with "reduce processing latency" idea. Anyway, I will restore TX completion back to NAPI poll. > I'm not applying this series, you are doing with TX handling exactly what we tell people not to do. I will come up with revised series in v2. Noam -- 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