netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] r8169: Support for byte queue limits

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: <1322844451.2762.36.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Fri, 02 Dec 2011 17:47:31 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	igorm@....rs
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>,
	Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] r8169: Support for byte queue limits

Le vendredi 02 décembre 2011 à 17:31 +0100, "Igor Maravić" a écrit :
> >
> > Quite frankly, any queued skb is eventually freed, so
> > netdev_reset_queue() could be avoided.
> >
> 
> If I didn't add netdev_reset_queue(), how dql would reset its parameters to 0?
> 

They are initted at device setup.

As I said, if every transmitted skb is correctly freed (and BQL
accounted), there is no need to netdev_reset_queue()

> I added spin_locks around netdev_completed_queue and netdev_sent_queue
> 

Oh well, no, dont do that. BQL must be lightweight.



--
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