netdev - Re: [PATCH] Execute tasklets in the same order they were queued

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20080211144927.55920e56.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:49:27 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Execute tasklets in the same order they were queued

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:28:13 -0600
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net> wrote:

> I noticed this when looking at an openswan issue. Openswan (ab?)uses
> the tasklet API to defer processing of packets in some situations,
> with one packet per tasklet_action(). I started noticing sequences of
> reverse-ordered sequence numbers coming over the wire, since new tasklets
> are always queued at the head of the list but processed sequentially.
> 
> Convert it to instead append new entries to the tail of the list. As an
> extra bonus, the splicing code in takeover_tasklets() no longer has to
> iterate over the list.
> 

hm, I'd have thought that this would already have caused problems in
networking.  And perhaps this change might have effects on networking too?

Probably it won't have _much_ effect on networking because networking
probably isn't queueing one tasklet per packet(!) but perhaps with bonded
channels or something like that?

--
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