netdev - Re: [RFC] net: napi fix

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, 13 Dec 2007 23:58:59 +0100
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com, gallatin@...i.com, joonwpark81@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jgarzik@...ox.com, shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
	jesse.brandeburg@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] net: napi fix

David Miller wrote, On 12/13/2007 11:34 PM:

> From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:28:41 +0100
> 
>> ...I'm afraid I can't understand: I mean doing the same but without
>> passing this info with 'work == weight': if driver sends this info,
>> why it can't instead call something like napi_continue() with
>> this list_move_tail() (and probably additional local_irq_disable()/
>> enble() - but since it's unlikely()?) which looks much more readable,
>> and saves one whole unlikely if ()?
> 
> Because the poll list is private to net_rx_action() and we don't
> want to expose implementation details like that to every
> ->poll() implementation.

So, it seems 'we' failed e.g. exposing napi_complete()...
OK, no offense, I'll only mention at the end that there is
always a possibility to redefine such a function to {} with any
change of implementation.

Jarek P.
--
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