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  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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46DDD37F.8080905@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 04 Sep 2007 14:51:59 -0700
From:	Bruce Cole <bacole@...il.com>
To:	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
CC:	john@...eSkyTours.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: r8169: slow samba performance

Francois Romieu wrote:
> Does "acceptable" mean that there is a noticeable difference when compared
> to the patch based on a busy-waiting loop ?
>
>   
>> Would you like me to *just* try patches 1 & 2, to help narrow down anything?
>>     
>
> I expect patch #2 alone to be enough to enhance the performance. If it gets
> proven, the patch would be a good candidate for a quick merge upstream.
>
>   
Patch #0002 looks functionally equivalent to the patch I already pointed 
folks
to and which I showed as being sufficient to address the TX queue problem.
The fix has also already been confirmed by shane, that fix being:

diff -c r/r8169.c r3/r8169-out.c
*** r/r8169.c   2007-08-18 11:54:58.000000000 -0700
--- r3/r8169-out.c      2007-09-04 14:23:49.000000000 -0700
***************
*** 2646,2651 ****
--- 2646,2655 ----
                if (netif_queue_stopped(dev) &&
                    (TX_BUFFS_AVAIL(tp) >= MAX_SKB_FRAGS)) {
                        netif_wake_queue(dev);
+               } else if (dirty_tx != tp->cur_tx) {
+                       netif_tx_lock(dev);
+                       RTL_W8(TxPoll, NPQ);
+                       netif_tx_unlock(dev);
                }
        }
  }


In any case, I've tried your latest version of the patch,
0002-r8169-workaround-against-ignored-TxPoll-writes-8168.patch, and it alone
works as well.


I'm not sure why you describe this as being an "8168 hack", given that the
problem has been seen with the 8111b chip (I have an 8111b chip on my 
gigabyte
motherboard).


Now since this change heals the TX queue stall, it would seem that the real
underlying problem involves a race condition with enqueueing to the TX queue
while the controller is processing the queue.  The ultimate fix for that 
I bet
is either to address locking at TX enqueue time, or there is a 
controller bug.
Any clarification from realtek on the necessary processing for the NPQ 
bit, or
a known controller problem?
 
PS: I've also received private email that this problem pertains to video
streaming (to a Kiss DVD player) not just samba or X11 traffic.  Basically
most all high-level TCP based protocols are affected it seems.  This serious
performance problem should be considered to impact a lot more than just 
samba
users.



-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ