netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V3 3/3] tun: rx batching

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:   Sat, 31 Dec 2016 13:03:32 -0800
From:   Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc:     mst@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        wexu@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V3 3/3] tun: rx batching

On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 13:20:51 +0800
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> wrote:

> diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
> index cd8e02c..a268ed9 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/tun.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
> @@ -75,6 +75,10 @@
>  
>  #include <linux/uaccess.h>
>  
> +static int rx_batched;
> +module_param(rx_batched, int, 0444);
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(rx_batched, "Number of packets batched in rx");
> +
>  /* Uncomment to enable debugging */

I like the concept or rx batching. But controlling it via a module parameter
is one of the worst API choices.  Ethtool would be better to use because that is
how other network devices control batching.

If you do ethtool, you could even extend it to have an number of packets
and max latency value.