netdev - Re: [net-next 02/11] igb: Use node specific allocations for the q

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: <m21uum2g28.fsf@firstfloor.org>
Date:	Sun, 09 Oct 2011 11:08:47 -0700
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, gospo@...hat.com, sassmann@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [net-next 02/11] igb: Use node specific allocations for the q_vectors and rings

Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> writes:
>  
>  	for (i = 0; i < adapter->num_tx_queues; i++) {
> -		ring = kzalloc(sizeof(struct igb_ring), GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (orig_node == -1) {
> +			int cur_node = next_online_node(adapter->node);
> +			if (cur_node == MAX_NUMNODES)
> +				cur_node = first_online_node;

RR seems quite arbitrary. Who guarantees those nodes have any
relationship with the CPUs submitting on those queues? Or the node
the device is on.

Anyways if it's a good idea probably need to add a
dma_alloc_coherent_node() too

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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