netdev - Re: future developments of usbnet

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: <201105120959.28473.oliver@neukum.org>
Date:	Thu, 12 May 2011 09:59:28 +0200
From:	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	shemminger@...tta.com, stern@...land.harvard.edu,
	tom.leiming@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: future developments of usbnet

Am Mittwoch, 11. Mai 2011, 19:47:27 schrieb David Miller:

> Basically once you take you interrupt, and disable device interrupts,
> the generic net device layer calls your ->poll() routing with a "weight"
> You should not process more RX packets than this value.
> 
> If you have less than "weight" work to do, you should do a napi_complete(),
> which takes you out of the polling group, and re-enable device interrupts.
> 
> So the idea is that you keep getting ->poll()'d until there is no more
> RX work to do.
> 
> The "weight" argument implements fairness amongst competing, actively
> polling, devices on the same CPU.
> 

Thank you, this is very informative. Our problem here is that USB doesn't work
sanely without interrupts. We can stop IO regarding rx, but we cannot stop
interrupts if we want to do rx.

	Regards
		Oliver
--
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