netdev - Re: NAPI and shared interrupt control

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: <1165488962.5027.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 07 Dec 2006 21:56:02 +1100
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Eugene Surovegin <ebs@...home.net>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: NAPI and shared interrupt control

On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 02:22 -0800, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 02:20:10AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > It also just occured to me that even if you use the dummy device
> > approach, it's the dummy device's quota that will be used by the
> > generic ->poll() downcall into the driver.
> 
> Yes, that's true. That's why I made this parameter 
> Konfig-configurable. Yes, this is not as flexible as run-time 
> configuration available for a real netdev, but better than nothing and 
> nobody has complained yet :)

Can we maybe change the dummy device weight as emacs get added to a
MAL ?

Dave, the main point of my initial email was: should we provide a
routine from the net core to initialize such dummy devices properly ?
I'm a little worried that some day, the NAPI code will change and the
initialisations done by the driver will not be enough anymore...

Cheers,
Ben.



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html