| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 13:13:21 +0200 From: Jean-Michel Hautbois <jhautbois@...il.com> To: Merav Sicron <meravs@...adcom.com> Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: UDP ordering when using multiple rx queue 2012/7/11 Merav Sicron <meravs@...adcom.com>: > 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. OK, sorry for not having explained that : the packets are multicast with a port for each stream. Sending one stream multicast on a bnx2x based NIC can lead to several queues used (two, for what I can see) and then, to the problem reported. >> 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. OK, thanks for this tip :). JM -- 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