netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 net-next] tcp: TCP Small Queues

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: <m2r4sirvmg.fsf@firstfloor.org>
Date:	Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:38:31 -0700
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, nanditad@...gle.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, codel@...ts.bufferbloat.net,
	ncardwell@...gle.com, mattmathis@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next] tcp: TCP Small Queues

Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> writes:
> +
> +		if (!sock_owned_by_user(sk)) {
> +			if ((1 << sk->sk_state) &
> +			    (TCPF_ESTABLISHED | TCPF_FIN_WAIT1 |
> +			     TCPF_CLOSING | TCPF_CLOSE_WAIT))
> +				tcp_write_xmit(sk,
> +					       tcp_current_mss(sk),
> +					       0, 0,
> +					       GFP_ATOMIC);

Did you have any problems with the GFP_ATOMIC allocation failing here?
I think you move some skb allocs from process context to ATOMIC, right?

It relies on the VM somehow catching up in another context.

May be interesting to try out under very high memory pressure.

-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