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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1192569295.11899.14.camel@pasglop> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 07:14:55 +1000 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>, linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] net: Add __napi_sycnhronize() to sync with napi poll > So this is really just like synchronize_irq()? Using msleep is bogus > because you want to spin, you are only waiting for a softirq on the other > cpu to finish. If you wait for a whole millisecond and sleep that > is far longer than the napi routine should take. > > You could even optimize it like synchronize_irq() for the non-SMP case. It's just like synchronize_irq() indeed. I used the mlseep() just like napi_disable() mostly because I use it in a very similar context, for disabling my sub-channels on things like link change etc... where I need to reconfigure parts of the chip. I prefer sleeping in my case but I agree that if somebody else was going to use for something else more performance critical, it might be an issue. On the other hand, spinning will not be nice for my usage scenario :-) I agree about the SMP optimisation though again, in my usage pattern, it's very unimportant (similar code path as napi_disable) I'll respin later today though. Cheers, Ben. - 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