linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH net-next v20 10/13] rtase: Implement ethtool function

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 03:40:23 +0000
From: Justin Lai <justinlai0215@...ltek.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "edumazet@...gle.com"
	<edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "andrew@...n.ch"
	<andrew@...n.ch>,
        "jiri@...nulli.us" <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "horms@...nel.org"
	<horms@...nel.org>,
        "rkannoth@...vell.com" <rkannoth@...vell.com>,
        "Ping-Ke
 Shih" <pkshih@...ltek.com>,
        Larry Chiu <larry.chiu@...ltek.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v20 10/13] rtase: Implement ethtool function

> 
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:28:13 +0000 Justin Lai wrote:
> > > Are you basically saying that since its an error it only matters if
> > > its zero or not? It's not going to be a great experience for anyone
> > > trying to use this driver. You can read this counter periodically
> > > from a timer and accumulate a fuller value in the driver. There's
> > > even struct ethtool_coalesce::stats_block_coalesce_usecs if you want
> > > to let user configure the period.
> >
> > As we've discussed, as long as this counter has a value, it can inform
> > the user that the host speed is too slow, and it will not affect other
> > transmission functions. Can we add this periodic reading function
> > after this patch version is merged?
> 
> You'd have to remove reporting of all 16b packet statistics and 32b byte
> statistics completely for now, and then follow up adding them with the
> periodic overflow checks.

Thank you for your reply, I will remove the 16b packet statistics and 32b
byte statistics report in this version.