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  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]
Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 2010 12:54:06 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <>,
	Stephen Hemminger <>
Cc:	Herbert Xu <>,
	David Miller <>,
Subject: [RFC] gro: Is it ok to share a single napi from several devs ?

In commit f2bde7328633269ee935d9ed96535ade15cc348f
Author: Stephen Hemminger <>

    net: allow multiple dev per napi with GRO
    GRO assumes that there is a one-to-one relationship between NAPI
    structure and network device. Some devices like sky2 share multiple
    devices on a single interrupt so only have one NAPI handler. Rather than
    split GRO from NAPI, just have GRO assume if device changes that
    it is a different flow.

It was assumed a napi could be shared by several devs, but I dont really
understand, since we have an unique ->dev pointer inside "napi_struct",
this one is set once, and never change.

This pointer is currently used from napi_get_frags() [but that could be
avoided], and from netpoll_poll_lock().

The netpoll_poll_lock() case is problematic.

static inline void *netpoll_poll_lock(struct napi_struct *napi)
        struct net_device *dev = napi->_dev;

        if (dev && dev->npinfo) {

Maybe we should remove 'dev' field from napi_struct and replace it by a
npinfo pointer ?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists