netdev - Re: [PATCH][NET_SCHED] sch_sfq: prevent unnecessary reordering

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: <20080428143946.GA2870@ami.dom.local>
Date:	Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:39:46 +0200
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][NET_SCHED] sch_sfq: prevent unnecessary reordering

David Miller wrote, On 04/28/2008 11:03 AM:
...
>> [NET_SCHED] sch_sfq: prevent unnecessary reordering
>>
>> Current check of queue limit in sfq_enqueue() isn't optimal: there
>> is really not much more needed to prevent unnecessary dropping and
>> possible reordering.
>>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
> 
> I'll let Patrick review this one first, too.

Very wise decision! (As usual.)

But, after rethinking, I've to withdraw this patch too. Sorry!

It looks like the patch could be quite right and should save sometimes
a few cpu cycles, but the subject and the comment are wrong: it doesn't
prevent reordering, but simply adding and later dropping the same
packet. So, the gain is less than planned. (Anyway, if somebody thinks
it's useful, I could resend it after changing...)

Thanks,
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