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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:58:22 +0100 From: Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Cc: peppe.cavallaro@...com, alexandre.torgue@...com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/17] net: stmmac: Implement NAPI for TX On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 10:15:30AM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com> > Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 14:41:45 +0100 > > > On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:12:25PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > >> From: Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com> > >> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:11:48 +0100 > >> > >> > The stmmac driver run TX completion under NAPI but without checking > >> > the work done by the TX completion function. > >> > >> The current behavior is correct and completely intentional. > >> > >> A driver should _never_ account TX work to the NAPI poll budget. > >> > >> This is because TX liberation is orders of magnitude cheaper than > >> receiving a packet, and such SKB freeing makes more SKBs available > >> for RX processing. > >> > >> Therefore, TX work should never count against the NAPI budget. > >> > >> Please do not fix something which is not broken. > > > > So at least the documentation I read must be fixed (https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/networking/napi) > > We have no control over nor care about what the Linux Foundation writes > about the Linux networking code. > > Complain to them and please do not bother us about it. > > Thank you. Sorry, this was not to bother you. Could you give me your opinion on the other question of the mail ? (just copied below) So perhaps the best way is to do like intel igb/ixgbe, keeping under NAPI until the stmmac_tx_clean function said that it finished handling the queue (with a distinct TX budget)? Thanks Regards
Powered by blists - more mailing lists