netdev - Re: [RFC] net_sched: mark packet staying on queue too long

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1294066948.2472.49.camel@mojatatu>
Date:	Mon, 03 Jan 2011 10:02:28 -0500
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...u.dk>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] net_sched: mark packet staying on queue too long

On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 15:02 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le lundi 03 janvier 2011 à 08:52 -0500, jamal a écrit :

> I got fairly good results here, but admit-idly on a LAN.

Maybe just adding the randomness marking factor alone may help.
It all depends on RTT.

> Yep, maybe adding RED on each SFQ slot ;) Should be fairly cheap, and
> actually needed in case ECN is not possible and we must earlly drop
> instead.
> 

That would essentially be achieving the goal of SF Blue.

> I found BLUE very expensive in term of cache line accesses. Especially
> with double hashing.

If you can do it cheaply as you describe above, maybe should be
sufficient.

> local tcp, for a router ? Hmm... But yes I see your point.

Oh;-> thought you were talking host where my mumbling would make
more sense.

> Speaking of ECN marking, it seems we (in RED/GRED or tunnels) change skb
> data even if it is shared (can happen on ingress path)
> 
> Probably harmless, but tcpdump can show ECN bit being marked even on skb
> snapshot before ingress (and later, ECN marked) or tunnels, while it
> came unset from the wire.
> 
> Is it worth fixing this ? maybe using skb_make_writable() [once moved to
> core network from netfilter]

Typically the netdev owns the packet once it gets to that level and
it can do whatever it wants with it. But if you are seeing it on
ingress (probably using ifb?), then it makes sense to fix it.

cheers,
jamal


--
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