netdev - Re: [net-next 10/12] bna: TX Queue Depth Fix

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: <1314765960.11043.3.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Wed, 31 Aug 2011 06:46:00 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Dave Taht <dave.taht@...il.com>
Cc:	Rasesh Mody <rmody@...cade.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, adapter_linux_open_src_team@...cade.com,
	Gurunatha Karaje <gkaraje@...cade.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 10/12] bna: TX Queue Depth Fix

Le mardi 30 août 2011 à 21:34 -0700, Dave Taht a écrit :
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 9:24 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:

> > BNAD_MAX_Q_DEPTH is now defined but not used.
> >
> > BTW, 32768 slots in a RX queue is insane.
> 
> As that is many lunar distances worth of buffering... Are they
> expecting transmissions from mars?
> 

At 10GB rate, this can be filled in ~2msec with small frames.

Apparently some people business depend on not losing frames.

But they should be warned of extra memory needs, and latency increases
(because of a larger working set)



--
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