netdev - Re: [PATCH v3] net: batch skb dequeueing from softnet input_pkt

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: <1271258409.16881.1701.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:20:09 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net: batch skb dequeueing from softnet
 input_pkt_queue

Le mercredi 14 avril 2010 à 17:52 +0800, Changli Gao a écrit :
> batch skb dequeueing from softnet input_pkt_queue
> 
> batch skb dequeueing from softnet input_pkt_queue to reduce potential lock
> contention and irq disabling/enabling.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>

Adding stop_machine() with no explanation ?

No ack from my previous comments, suggestions, and still same logic ?

Are we supposed to read patch, test it, make some benches, correct bugs,
say Amen ?

This is becoming silly, if you ask me.

This is a NACK of this patch, obviously.

--
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