netdev - Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8536] New: Kernel drops UDP packets silently when reading from certain proc file entries

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: <46568D05.9080309@cosmosbay.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 May 2007 09:15:17 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org,
	andsve@...il.com
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8536] New: Kernel drops UDP packets silently
 when reading from certain proc file entries

Herbert Xu a écrit :
> On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 08:50:20AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> If this patch really helps, this means cond_resched_softirq()
>> doesnt work at all and should be fixed, or just zapped as it
>> is seldom used.
> 
> cond_resched_softirq lets other threads run if they want to.
> It doesn't run pending softirq's at all.  In fact, it doesn't
> even wake up ksoftirqd.

I am very glad you fixed /proc/net/tcp, but I would like to
understand why this cond_resched_softirq() even exist.

Its name and behavior dont match at all.

The only remaining use is in __release_sock().

Should we schedule threads, or ksoftirqd as well in this function ?


-
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