netdev - Re: [PATCH] [NIU] VLAN does not work with niu 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20090909.171517.34998160.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:15:17 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	Joyce.Yu@....com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [NIU] VLAN does not work with niu driver

From: Joyce Yu <Joyce.Yu@....com>
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 14:10:48 -0700

> drivers/net/niu.h |    2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

Can I get a more verbose commit message than this?

> @@ -2700,7 +2700,7 @@ struct fcram_hash_ipv6 {
> #define RCR_PKT_TYPE_UDP               0x2
> #define RCR_PKT_TYPE_SCTP              0x3
> 
> -#define NIU_RXPULL_MAX                 ETH_HLEN
> +#define NIU_RXPULL_MAX                 64
> 

See, that's why I want a detailed commit message, because if you
described things more clearly I'd understand why you choose the value
'64' as opposed to, say, the size of a VLAN header which to me would
be a more appropriate value to use here.

You just seem to be reverting a change I made a while back, and it
just so happens to fix your problem.  But '64' is too large a value
to use here and it will impact performance.

You did check to see if there were any performance regressions
resulting from your change, right?
--
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