linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH net-next 2/2] r8152: adjust rtl_start

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: <0835B3720019904CB8F7AA43166CEEB2ECE8EF@RTITMBSV03.realtek.com.tw>
Date:	Thu, 13 Nov 2014 02:31:14 +0000
From:	Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	nic_swsd <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 2/2] r8152: adjust rtl_start_rx

David Miller [mailto:davem@...emloft.net] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 3:50 AM
[...]
> > According to the usbnet.c, it would make sure to submit the
> > number of min(10, RX_QLEN(dev)) rx buffers. If there are
> > not enough rx buffers, it schedule a tasklet for next try.
> > 
> > The brief flow is as following.
> > 1. Call open().
> >    - schedule a tasklet.
> > 2. Tasklet is called.
> >    if (dev->rxq.qlen < RX_QLEN(dev)) {
> > 	   - submit rx buffers util the number of
> > 	     min(10, RX_QLEN(dev)). If the error
> > 	     occurs, break the loop.
> > 	   - If the dev->rxq.qlen < RX_QLEN(dev),
> > 	     schedule the tasklet.
> >    }
> 
> That sounds like a better recovery model, why don't you mimick it?

My last method which I mentioned yesterday is similar to
this one. The difference is that I would re-use the rx
buffers, so I have to add them to the list for re-submitting,
not alwayes allocate new one.

Although one rx buffer could contain many packets, I don't
think the whole size of the rx buffer is alwayes used.
Therefore, I re-use the rx buffers to avoid allocating
the 16K bytes rx buffer alwayes. This also makes sure that
I always have the buffers to submit without allocating new
one.

If you could accept this, I would modify this patch by
this way.
 
Best Regards,
Hayes
--
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/