linux-kernel - Re: Bug 7596 - 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: <20061219.185525.41636407.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 19 Dec 2006 18:55:25 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:	shemminger@...l.org, mingo@...e.hu, akpm@...l.org, wenji@...l.gov,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug 7596 - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 10:52:19 +1100

> Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org> wrote:
> > I noticed this bit of discussion in tcp_recvmsg. It implies that a better
> > queuing policy would be good. But it is confusing English (Alexey?) so
> > not sure where to start.
> 
> Actually I think the comment says that the current code isn't the
> most elegant but is more efficient.

It's just explaining the hierarchy of queues that need to
be purged, and in what order, for correctness.

Alexey added that code when I mentioned to him, right after
we added the prequeue, that it was possible process the
normal backlog before the prequeue, which is illegal.
In fixing that bug, he added the comment we are discussing.
-
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/