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: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 00:05:47 -0700 From: "Michael Chan" <mchan@...adcom.com> To: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net> cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, jgarzik@...ox.com, hadi@...erus.ca, rusty@...tcorp.com.au Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC]: napi_struct V4 David Miller wrote: > So that ->poll_controller() can process TX acks by just having > the TX lock and interrupts disabled. > > Can you think of another way to process TX acks from absolutely > any execution context whatsoever? That's what we need and > preferably in some generic way, and the above is what I came > up with. What are we trying to protect against by taking the TX lock before calling ->poll_controller()? > > To be honest I don't think the TX lock contention will matter, and > even if there were a small cost, the simplicity of the netpoll > implementation is worth it given how problematic and hard to debug > netpoll has been in the past. > > There is a measurable difference in oprofile. When passing small packets, there's a non-trivial difference in throughput. - 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