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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 28 Jun 2007 23:18:05 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	"Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
CC:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"Kok, Auke-jan H" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>, hadi@...erus.ca
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] NET: [CORE] Stack changes to add multiqueue hardware
 support API

Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P wrote:
>>
>> Looking at Peter's multiqueue patch, which should include all 
>> hard_start_xmit users (I'm not seeing sch_teql though, 
>> Peter?) the only other one is pktgen.
>>     
>
> Ugh.  That is another netif_queue_stopped() that needs
> netif_subqueue_stopped().  I can send an updated patch for the core to
> fix this based from your patches Patrick.
>   

I still have the tree around, here's an updated version.

>
> So what do we do about netpoll then wrt netif_(sub)queue_stopped() being
> removed from qdisc_restart()?  The fallout of having netpoll() cause a
> queue to stop (queue 0 only) is the skb sent will be requeued, since the
> driver will return NETIF_TX_BUSY if this actually happens.  But this is
> a corner case, and we won't lose packets; we'll just have increased
> latency on that queue.  Should I worry about this or just move forward
> with the sch_teql.c change and repost the core patch?
>   


I don't think you need to worry about that, the subqueue
patch just follows the existing code.


View attachment "01.diff" of type "text/x-diff" (16276 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists