netdev - Re: [RFC] multiqueue changes

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: <20091102.043907.236634594.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 02 Nov 2009 04:39:07 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	jarkao2@...il.com
Cc:	mchan@...adcom.com, kaber@...sh.net, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] multiqueue changes

From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 12:30:29 +0000

> Right, but it's not a 50% chance, I guess? A user most of the time
> gets consistently multiqueue or non-multiqueue behavior after open,
> unless I miss something. Then such an exceptional state could be
> handled by real_num_tx_queues (just like in case of powered of cpus).
> The main difference is to hold in num_tx_queues something that is
> really available vs max possible value for all configs.

I see your point, yes this would seem to be a reasonable way
to start handling num_tx_queues and real_num_tx_queues.
--
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