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]
Date:	Thu, 7 Jun 2007 09:08:40 -0700
From:	Stephen Hemminger <>
To:	David Miller <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NET: Multiqueue network device support.

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 16:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <> wrote:

> From: jamal <>
> Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 19:35:46 -0400
> > There is no potential for parallelizing on transmit that i can think of.
> > Dave, please explain it slowly so i can understand it.
> > 
> > There is huge potential for parallelizing on receive. But i am certainly
> > missing the value in the transmit.
> I gave an example in another response, you have N processes
> queueing up data for TCP or UDP or whatever in parallel on
> different cpus, all going out the same 10gbit device.
> All of them enter into ->hard_start_xmit(), and thus all of them try
> to take the same netdev->tx_lock
> If they have multiple TX queues, independantly programmable, that
> single lock is stupid.
> We could use per-queue TX locks for such hardware, but we can't
> support that currently.

There could be bad packet reordering with this (like some SMP routers used to do).

Stephen Hemminger <>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists