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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 18:58:33 +0530 From: Krishna Kumar2 <krkumar2@...ibm.com> To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jarkao2@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Don't run __qdisc_run() on a stopped TX queue Hi Herbert, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> wrote on 07/29/2009 06:14:28 AM: > > Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Don't run __qdisc_run() on a stopped TX queue > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:59:19PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > > > > The premise is that there'd be only one. The qdisc lock. > > > > If the traffic is distributed, flow wise, the driver XMIT > > lock would spread due to multiqueue. > > Suppose that we have a single large flow going through that has > filled up the hardware queue and is now backlogged in the qdisc > with qdisc_run on CPU A. Now some other flow comes along and > sends a packet on CPU B. > > So now CPU A and B will both be processing packets for the first > flow causing loads of lock contention. > > But worse yet, we have introduced packet reordering. So are you > convinced now :) I am probably misunderstanding you, but ... For different flows, is this an issue? The same TCP connection will always use a single TXQ, even if it runs on different CPUs since dev_pick_tx will select the same txq, so how will reordering happen? thanks, - KK (I am off tomorrow, but will be around for the next 3 hours) -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists