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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1342004939.27284.28.camel@lb-tlvb-meravs.il.broadcom.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:08:59 +0300 From: "Merav Sicron" <meravs@...adcom.com> To: "Jean-Michel Hautbois" <jhautbois@...il.com> cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: UDP ordering when using multiple rx queue On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 00:53 -0700, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote: > Several tests lead to a simple conclusion : when the NIC has only one > RX queue, everything is ok (like be2net for instance), but when it has > more than one RX queue, then I can have "lost packets". > This is the case for bnx2x or mlx4 for instance. >>From what you describe I assume that you use different source IP / destination IP in each packet - is this something that you can control? Because with the same IP addresses the traffic will be steered to the same queue. > Here are my questions : > - Is it possible to force a driver to use only one rx queue, even if > it can use more without reloading the driver (and this is feasible > only when a parameter exists for that !) ? You can reduce the number of queues using "ethtool -L ethX combined 1". Note however that it will cause automatic driver unload/load. Thanks, Merav -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists