linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP

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]

Message-ID: <20061201095306.GA21232@2ka.mipt.ru>
Date:	Fri, 1 Dec 2006 12:53:07 +0300
From:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, mingo@...e.hu, wenji@...l.gov,
	akpm@...l.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP

On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 12:14:43PM -0800, David Miller (davem@...emloft.net) wrote:
> > It steals timeslices from other processes to complete tcp_recvmsg()
> > task, and only when it does it for too long, it will be preempted.
> > Processing backlog queue on behalf of need_resched() will break
> > fairness too - processing itself can take a lot of time, so process
> > can be scheduled away in that part too.
> 
> Yes, at this point I agree with this analysis.
> 
> Currently I am therefore advocating some way to allow
> full input packet handling even amidst tcp_recvmsg()
> processing.

Isn't it a step in direction of full tcp processing bound to process
context? :)

-- 
	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/