netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 09/14] tg3: Improve small packet 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: <20100804222741.GA18708@kryten>
Date:	Thu, 5 Aug 2010 08:27:41 +1000
From:	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>
To:	Matt Carlson <mcarlson@...adcom.com>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, andy@...yhouse.net,
	Michael Chan <mchan@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 09/14] tg3: Improve small packet performance


Hi,

Just saw this go in:
  
>  static inline u32 tg3_tx_avail(struct tg3_napi *tnapi)
>  {
> -	smp_mb();
> +	/* Tell compiler to fetch tx indices from memory. */
> +	barrier();
>  	return tnapi->tx_pending -
>  	       ((tnapi->tx_prod - tnapi->tx_cons) & (TG3_TX_RING_SIZE - 1));
>  }

Which worries me. Are we sure we don't need any ordering (eg smp_rmb)?
A compiler barrier does nothing to ensure two loads are ordered.

Anton
--
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