linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 3/3] net: add socket option for low latency polling

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: <51B87091.4050205@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:58:57 +0300
From:	Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	Don Skidmore <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>,
	e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, HPA <hpa@...or.com>,
	Eilon Greenstien <eilong@...adcom.com>,
	Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>,
	Amir Vadai <amirv@...lanox.com>,
	Alex Rosenbaum <alexr@...lanox.com>,
	Avner Ben Hanoch <avnerb@...lanox.com>,
	Or Kehati <ork@...lanox.com>,
	Eliezer Tamir <eliezer@...ir.org.il>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 3/3] net: add socket option for low latency
 polling

On 12/06/2013 15:54, Eliezer Tamir wrote:
> On 12/06/2013 15:44, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 14:20 +0300, Eliezer Tamir wrote:
>>> adds a socket option for low latency polling.
>>> This allows overriding the global sysctl value with a per-socket one.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> It seems EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sysctl_net_ll_poll) can now be removed ?
>
> I think we would need it for poll.
>
> Poll needs a way that is not dependent on any individual socket to know
> how long to busy-wait, since we have to know it before we poll any
> individual socket.

Or maybe, since the time constants seem to be different, we should have
two separate sysctl values, one for read and another for poll?

(and then the one for read does not need to be exported to modules.)
--
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/