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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 08:42:24 +0800 From: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com> To: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Subject: Re: Netperf TCP_RR(loopback) 10% regression in 2.6.24-rc6, comparing with 2.6.22 On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 10:36 -0800, Rick Jones wrote: > When parsing the -P option in scan_socket_args() of src/nettest_bsd.c, > netperf is using "break_args()" from src/netsh.c which indeed if the > command line says "-P 12345" will set both the local and remote port > numbers to 12345. If instead you were to say "-P 12345," it will use > 12345 only for the netperf side. If you say "-P ,12345" it will use > 12345 only for the netserver side. To set both sides at once to > different values it would be "-P 12345,54321" > > In theory, send_udp_rr() in src/nettest_bsd.c (or I suppose > scan_socket_args() could have more code added to it to check for a UDP > test over loopback, but probably needs to be a check for any local IP, > and unless this becomes something bigger than "Doctor! Doctor! It hurts > when I do this!" :) I'm inclined to leave it as caveat benchmarker and > perhaps some additional text in the manual. I will instrument kernel to see if kernel does work like it is expected. When an issue is found, we shouldn't escape by saying it's nothing to do with me. -yanmin -- 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