netdev - Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: sch_netem: Limit packet re-ordering functionality to tfifo qdisc.

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: <48FF4E06.8040505@trash.net>
Date:	Wed, 22 Oct 2008 18:00:06 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	jarkao2@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, shemminger@...tta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: sch_netem: Limit packet re-ordering functionality
 to tfifo qdisc.

[Damn hotkeys for sending incomplete mails :)]

David Miller wrote:
> From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 22:12:10 +0200
> 
>> pkt_sched: sch_netem: Limit packet re-ordering functionality to tfifo qdisc.
>>
>> After introducing qdisc->ops->peek() method the only remaining user of
>> qdisc->ops->requeue() is netem_enqueue() using this for packet
>> re-ordering. According to Patrick McHardy: "a lot of the functionality
>> of netem requires the inner tfifo anyways and rate-limiting is usually
>> done on top of netem. So I would suggest so either hard-wire the tfifo
>> qdisc or at least make the assumption that inner qdiscs are work-
>> conserving." This patch tries the former.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
> 
> This is an interesting patch.
> 
> But the thing that strikes me is this: Why don't we just let sch_netem do
> the reordering inside of itself entirely and just get rid of all of this
> ->requeue() business?

I fully agree, keeping all the ->requeue crap around just for this
cornercase doesn't seem like a good decision. Most of the ->requeue
functions are completely inconsistent in their behaviour anyways:
some undo ->enqueue state changes (which is obviously broken for
netem), some don't, some redo checks from ->enqueue (necessary for
netem), some don't (TBF), ...
--
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