netdev - Re: tun mq failure

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: <20130123131845.GB18276@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:18:45 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: tun mq failure

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 08:08:07PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On 01/23/2013 07:06 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:05:16PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >> This is when trying to start a VPN using some old openvpn binary so MQ
> >> is not set.
> >>
> >> So
> >> 1. I think we should limit allocation of MQ to when MQ flag is set in SETIFF.
> >> 2. order 7 allocation is 2^^7 pages - about half a megabyte of contigious
> >>    memory. This is quite likely to fail.
> >>    Let's start with a small limit on number of queues, like 8?
> >>    Then we know it will succeed.
> >>    Longer term we might want to solve it differently.
> > This has been come up before:
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/255647/focus=255902
> >
> > I think a solution to this problem is still outstanding.
> >
> I draft a patch in the reply of in that thread, but didn't get feedback
> from reporter.

Yes it's essentialy same.
So can you please submit an official patch with proper
subject commit log and signature?
--
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