| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20060803182911.GA8692@2ka.mipt.ru> Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 22:29:11 +0400 From: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru> To: Arnd Hannemann <arnd@...dnet.de> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, olel@....pl Subject: Re: problems with e1000 and jumboframes On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 08:09:07PM +0200, Arnd Hannemann (arnd@...dnet.de) wrote: > Evgeniy Polyakov schrieb: > > On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 07:16:31PM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov (johnpol@....mipt.ru) wrote: > >>>> then skb_alloc adds a little > >>>> (sizeof(struct skb_shared_info)) at the end, and this ends up > >>>> in 32k request just for 9k jumbo frame. > >>> Strange, why this skb_shared_info cannon be added before first alignment? > >>> And what about smaller frames like 1500, does this driver behave similar > >>> (first align then add)? > >> It can be. > >> Could attached (completely untested) patch help? > > > > Actually this patch will not help, this new one could. > > > > I applied the attached pachted. And got this output: > > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 13762 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16058 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15894 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15730 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15566 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15402 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15238 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15074 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 14910 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 14746 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 14582 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 14418 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 14254 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 14090 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 13926 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 13762 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16058 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15894 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15730 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15566 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15402 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15238 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 15074 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 14910 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 14746 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 14582 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 14418 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - bufsz 16222 > > I'm a bit puzzled that there are so much allocations. However the patch > seems to work. (at least not obviously breaks things for me yet) Very strange output actually - comments in the code say that frame size can not exceed 0x3f00, but in this log it is much more than 16128 and that is after sizeof(struct skb_shared_info) has been removed... Could you please remove debug output and run some network stress test in parallel with high disk/memory activity to check if that does not break your system and watch /proc/slabinfo for 16k and 32k sized pools. > Best regards > Arnd -- Evgeniy Polyakov - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists