netdev - Re: 2.6.24 BUG: soft lockup

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 28 Mar 2008 16:29:53 +0100
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	Matheos Worku <Matheos.Worku@....COM>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, hadi@...erus.ca
Subject: Re: 2.6.24 BUG: soft lockup - CPU#X

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:56:34PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 03:39:53PM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > 
> > Probably some backlog would be necessary, similarly to RX. The main
> 
> Sorry but I still don't understand how this would differ from
> what we do now.  As it stands the packet would be queued for
> later processing if another CPU is doing a qdisc run.

But during this, now limited, time of qdisc_run() there is a contention
for queue_lock and probably some additional cache updating because of
this other enqueuing, which could be delayed especially if queue length
is above some level.

Cheers,
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