netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] bonding: fix incorrect transmit queue offset

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: <20110225225636.GA18792@linuxace.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:56:36 -0800
From:	Phil Oester <kernel@...uxace.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	bhutchings@...arflare.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, fubar@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bonding: fix incorrect transmit queue offset

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 03:54:51PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 23:37:49 +0000
> 
> > On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 15:13 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Phil Oester <kernel@...uxace.com>
> >> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 15:08:44 -0800
> >> 
> >> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 02:42:49PM -0500, Andy Gospodarek wrote:
> >> >> +     while (txq >= dev->real_num_tx_queues) {
> >> >> +             /* let the user know if we do not have enough tx queues */
> >> >> +             if (net_ratelimit())
> >> >> +                     pr_warning("%s selects invalid tx queue %d.  Consider"
> >> >> +                                " setting module option tx_queues > %d.",
> >> >> +                                dev->name, txq, dev->real_num_tx_queues);
> >> >> +             txq -= dev->real_num_tx_queues;
> >> >> +     }
> >> > 
> >> > Think this would be better as a WARN_ONCE, as otherwise syslog will still
> >> > get flooded with this - even when ratelimited.  See get_rps_cpu in 
> >> > net/core/dev.c as an example.o
> >> 
> >> Agreed.
> > 
> > This shouldn't WARN at all.  It is perfectly valid (though non-optimal)
> > to have different numbers of queues on two different multiqueue devices.
> 
> That's also a good point.

The patch works as expected.  Do we have any agreement on a final version?

Phil
--
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