netdev - Re: [RFC] gro: Is it ok to share a single napi from several devs ?

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]

Date:	Sat, 28 Aug 2010 15:33:55 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	shemminger@...tta.com
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, jarkao2@...il.com,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] gro: Is it ok to share a single napi from several devs ?

From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 15:31:24 -0700

> On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 14:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> 
>> Since netpoll does similar things, this means both NAPI and netpoll
>> cannot function properly with SKY2's second port.  It will only work
>> right on the first port.
> 
> I knew netpoll was broken on second port.

Well, now we know that GRO is too :-)

If we wish to keep the one-to-one mapping of NAPI contexts to
interrupt sources, what we can do is provide some kind of "dev list".

The other option is to register two NAPI contexts and schedule them
both on an interrupt.

But in both cases, detecting the end of polling, and thus when to turn
the interrupts back on, is non-trivial.

I really don't like either solution, therefore, so I'll try to brain
storm on this a bit more.
--
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