linux-kernel - Re: txqueuelen has wrong units; should be time

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: <AANLkTimofhhH5omyk=HhkyaNG+MGqoac4rDf=dPuR7K-@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 27 Feb 2011 18:33:39 -0500
From:	Albert Cahalan <acahalan@...il.com>
To:	Jussi Kivilinna <jussi.kivilinna@...et.fi>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@....pp.se>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: txqueuelen has wrong units; should be time

On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 5:55 AM, Jussi Kivilinna
<jussi.kivilinna@...et.fi> wrote:

> I made simple hack on sch_fifo with per packet time limits (attachment) this
> weekend and have been doing limited testing on wireless link. I think
> hardlimit is fine, it's simple and does somewhat same as what
> packet(-hard)limited buffer does, drops packets when buffer is 'full'. My
> hack checks for timed out packets on enqueue, might be wrong approach (on
> other hand might allow some more burstiness).

Thanks!

I think the default is too high. 1 ms may even be a bit high.

I suppose there is a need to allow at least 2 packets despite any
time limits, so that it remains possible to use a traditional modem
even if a huge packet takes several seconds to send.
--
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/