netdev - Re: Re-queueing of skb in vlan_skb

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]

Message-ID: <20080411125313.GI9785@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:53:13 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc:	Brian Oostenbrink <Brian_Oostenbrink@...-sierra.com>,
	linux-net@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re-queueing of skb in vlan_skb_recv

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 02:46:35PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Brian Oostenbrink wrote:
> >In vlan_skb_recv, packets are generally stripped of their vlan header,
> >and then re-queued via netif_rx().  Is there a reason for re-queuing
> >these instead of calling netif_receive_skb() directly?  On our system
> >(an embedded linux router), this re-queuing has a significant
> >performance penalty.
> 
> Its done to save stack space. There's currently a discussion
> about making loopback use netif_receive_skb in case enough
> stack is still available. Once that patch gets merged I'll
> change VLAN in a similar way.

Another possibility would be to allow ->func() of packet_type to return an
skb for reprocessing...
--
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