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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 09:12:52 -0400 From: jamal <hadi@...erus.ca> To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> Cc: Sridhar Samudrala <sri@...ibm.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com, jeff@...zik.org, kaber@...sh.net, peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] NET: Multiqueue network device support. On Fri, 2007-08-06 at 22:37 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > Hmm I wasn't describing how it works now. I'm talking about how it > would work if we removed LLTX and replaced the private tx_lock with > netif_tx_lock. I got that - it is what tg3 does for example. To mimick that behavior in LLTX, a driver needs to use the same lock on both tx and receive. e1000 holds a different lock on tx path from rx path. Maybe theres something clever i am missing; but it seems to be a bug on e1000. The point i was making is that it was strange i never had problems despite taking away the lock on the tx side and using the rx side concurently. cheers, jamal - 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists