linux-kernel - Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH v3] Topcliff: Update PCH

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: <000b01cb6503$962bc7f0$66f8800a@maildom.okisemi.com>
Date:	Wed, 6 Oct 2010 12:07:15 +0900
From:	"Masayuki Ohtake" <masa-korg@....okisemi.com>
To:	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	<mkl@...gutronix.de>, <sameo@...ux.intel.com>, <chripell@...e.org>,
	<meego-dev@...go.com>, <morinaga526@....okisemi.com>,
	<joel.clark@...el.com>, <kok.howg.ewe@...el.com>,
	<socketcan-core@...ts.berlios.de>, <yong.y.wang@...el.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<margie.foster@...el.com>, <qi.wang@...el.com>,
	<andrew.chih.howe.khor@...el.com>, <wg@...ndegger.com>
Subject: Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH v3] Topcliff: Update PCH_CAN driver to 2.6.35

Hi David,

On Wednesday, October 06, 2010 3:45 AM, David Miller wrote,
> We encourage all new drivers that can use NAPI to do so, just because
> recent driver submissions do not do this doesn't mean we should
> continue such a mistake ;-)

I understand NAPI's merit.
But, since we have already implemented without NAPI.
If possible, we don't want to use NAPI.

Does your mail mean, for accepting upstream, NAPI is essential for CAN driver ?
If essential, we will just do.

Thanks, Ohtake(OKISemi)
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
To: <masa-korg@....okisemi.com>
Cc: <mkl@...gutronix.de>; <sameo@...ux.intel.com>; <chripell@...e.org>; <meego-dev@...go.com>;
<morinaga526@....okisemi.com>; <joel.clark@...el.com>; <kok.howg.ewe@...el.com>; <socketcan-core@...ts.berlios.de>;
<yong.y.wang@...el.com>; <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; <netdev@...r.kernel.org>; <margie.foster@...el.com>;
<qi.wang@...el.com>; <andrew.chih.howe.khor@...el.com>; <wg@...ndegger.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 3:45 AM
Subject: Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH v3] Topcliff: Update PCH_CAN driver to 2.6.35


> From: "Masayuki Ohtake" <masa-korg@....okisemi.com>
> Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 21:09:30 +0900
>
> > On Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:08 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> >> If FIFO is working you might also think about NAPI.
> >
> > I think NAPI isn't necessary for our CAN driver.
> > NAPI is for high-speed networking.
> > CAN is NOT high-speed.
> >
> > In fact, some accepted CAN drivers don't have NAPI.
>
> NAPI is not just for performance concerns.
>
> It greatly simplifies the locking since all packet processing paths
> run only in software interrupt context, never in hardware interrupt
> context.
>
> We encourage all new drivers that can use NAPI to do so, just because
> recent driver submissions do not do this doesn't mean we should
> continue such a mistake ;-)
> --
> 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
>


--
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/