netdev - Re: |PATCH net-next-2.6] ifb: use netif_receive_skb() instead of netif

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: <1292422896.3427.251.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:21:36 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	hadi@...erus.ca
Cc:	Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	netem@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: |PATCH net-next-2.6] ifb: use netif_receive_skb() instead of
 netif_rx()

Le mercredi 15 décembre 2010 à 07:49 -0500, jamal a écrit :
> On Wed, 2010-12-15 at 09:39 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > In ri_tasklet(), we run from softirq, so can directly handle packet
> > through netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx().
> > There is no risk of recursion.
> 
> Eric, did you do at least a simple test on this one? 
> It used to be problematic (I cant remember why or
> what use case was problematic).

Yes, I run SFQ / IFB right now on my dev machine, and found SFQ bugs by
the way ;)



--
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