netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/4] sfc: resolve tx multiqueue bug

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:	Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:00:23 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	bhutchings@...arflare.com
Cc:	jgarzik@...ox.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] sfc: resolve tx multiqueue bug

From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:41:19 +0100

> So long as a queue is only woken in response to TX completions, the current
> arrangement is fine.  However, sfc needs to tear down and restart hardware TX
> queues as part of some reconfiguration, self-test and recovery code, and I
> doubt it's the only such driver.

Mark the carrier off and packets will stop flowing to the driver.

Or, alternatively, take the necessary TX spinlocks around the
reconfiguration.

> I think the corresponding kernel queue must be stopped and then started when
> we do this (otherwise we could return NETDEV_TX_BUSY in hard_start_xmit, but
> I understand that to be deprecated).  So we must also wake the kernel queue
> if and only if it's considered active - but we don't know whether that's the
> case because deactivation is done asynchronously.

See above.
--
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