netdev - Re: [Linux-ATM-General] [PATCH] br2684 testing needed for packet loss and performance

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: <200908281225.n7SCPUC3031293@cmf.nrl.navy.mil>
Date:	Fri, 28 Aug 2009 08:25:30 -0400
From:	"Chas Williams (CONTRACTOR)" <chas@....nrl.navy.mil>
To:	Karl Hiramoto <karl@...amoto.org>
cc:	linux-atm-general@...ts.sourceforge.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Linux-ATM-General] [PATCH] br2684 testing needed for packet loss and performance

In message <4A97B3A9.6040103@...amoto.org>,Karl Hiramoto writes:
>Anyone care to test or comment on  these patches?  I've attached 
>versions for 2.6.28 and 2.6.30.

this needs to be against the net-2.6 git repository.  but the 2.6.30
would probably apply just fine.  except for the comments, below this
patch looks fine and makes sense.  a similar thing had to be done for
the lec.c interface.

>+/* chained vcc->pop function.  Check if we should wake the netif_queue */
>+static void br2684_pop(struct atm_vcc *vcc, struct sk_buff *skb)
>+{
>+	struct br2684_vcc *brvcc = BR2684_VCC(vcc);
>+	struct net_device *net_dev = brvcc->device;
>+
>+	pr_debug("br2684_pop(vcc %p ; net_dev %p )\n", vcc, net_dev);
>+	brvcc->old_pop(vcc, skb);
>+
>+	if (!net_dev)
>+		return;
>+
>+ 	if (atm_may_send(vcc, 0)) {
>+		netif_wake_queue(net_dev);
>+ 	}

you dont need the { } here.

>+
>+	if (!atm_may_send(atmvcc, 0)) {
>+  		netif_stop_queue(brvcc->device);
>+		barrier();
>+		/* check for race with br26864_pop*/
>+		if (atm_may_send(atmvcc, 0)) {
>+			netif_start_queue(brvcc->device);
>+		}
>+	}
>+

i dont think the barrier() is necessary.
--
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