netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] mlx4_en: TX ring size default to 1024

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: <20120224.151415.831305774793653355.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:14:15 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	yevgenyp@...lanox.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] mlx4_en: TX ring size default to 1024

From: Yevgeny Petrilin <yevgenyp@...lanox.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 19:35:45 +0000

> On the other hand, when having smaller queue with 1000 in-flight
> packets would mean queue would be stopped, how is it better?

It's a thousand times better.

Because if a high priority packet gets queued up it won't have to wait
for 1024 packets to hit the wire before it can go out.

You need to support byte queue limits before you jack things up so high
like this, otherwise high priority packets are absolutely pointless
and unusable.
--
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