netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/3]: tg3: Manage TX backlog in-driver.

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: <20080620154124.eb91fd5e.billfink@mindspring.com>
Date:	Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:41:24 -0400
From:	Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	krkumar2@...ibm.com, mchan@...adcom.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	vinay@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3]: tg3: Manage TX backlog in-driver.

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, David Miller wrote:

> From: Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>
> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:52:33 -0400
> 
> > I have a general question about this new tx queueing model, which
> > I haven't seen discussed to this point.
> > 
> > Although hopefully not frequent events, if the tx queue is kept in
> > the driver rather than the network midlayer, what are the ramifications
> > of a routing change which requires changing the output to a new interface,
> > considering for example that on our 10-GigE interfaces we typically set
> > txqueuelen to 10000.
> 
> All of the packets would have been in the existing mid-layer generic
> backlog anyways, way past the routing decisions.  Nothing about
> behavior in this area would be changing.

Great.  I wasn't aware the mid-layer generic backlog was after the
routing decisions.  Thanks for educating me (and others).  I learn
new things about the Linux network stack all the time, plus it's
always changing, so can be a challenge to keep up with it if you're
not a full-time developer.

> > Similarly, what are the ramifications of such a change to the bonding
> > driver (either in a load balancing or active/backup scenario) when one
> > of the interfaces fails (again hopefully a rare event).
> 
> Since the bonding driver acts like a pass-thru, and because of the
> above, I expect no real ramifications in this area as well.

Also good to know.

						-Thanks

						-Bill
--
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