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, 26 Jul 2007 00:05:47 -0700
From:	"Michael Chan" <>
To:	"David Miller" <>
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
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists