netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] virtio_net: remove send completion interrupts and avoid TX queue overrun through packet drop

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: <1300374605.3255.43.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:10:05 -0700
From:	Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] virtio_net: remove send completion interrupts and
 avoid TX queue overrun through packet drop

On Thu, 2011-03-17 at 15:40 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> This is fascinating... and deeply weird.
> 
> OK, what's the difference between calling xmit_skb and ignoring
> failure,
> and this patch which figures out it's going to fail before calling
> xmit_skb?
> 
> ie. what if you *just* delete this:

Somehow what was in my mind, add_buf is more expensive than simply
checked ring capacity. I retest it with your and Michael's suggestion
here.

Thanks
Shirley

--
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