[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130326112959.GF7004@zion.uk.xensource.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 11:29:59 +0000
From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
CC: Wei Liu <liuw@...w.name>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
"konrad.wilk@...cle.com" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xen.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
"annie.li@...cle.com" <annie.li@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/6] xen-netback: coalesce slots before
copying
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 11:13:38AM +0000, David Vrabel wrote:
> >>
> >> Separately, it may be sensible for the backend to drop packets with more
> >> frags than max-slots-per-frame up to some threshold where anything more
> >> is considered malicious (i.e., 1 - 18 slots is a valid packet, 19-20 are
> >> dropped and 21 or more is a fatal error).
> >>
> >
> > Why drop the packet when we are able to process it? Frontend cannot know
> > it has crossed the line anyway.
>
> Because it's a change to the protocol and we do not want to do this for
> a regression fix.
>
If I understand correctly the regression you talked about was introduced
by harsh punishment in XSA-39? If so, this is the patch you need to fix
that. Frontend only knows that it has connectivity or not. This patch
guarantee that the old netfront with larger MAX_SKB_FRAGS still see the
same thing from its point of view. Netfront cannot know the
intermediate state between 18 and 20.
> As a separate fix we can consider increasing the number of slots
> per-packet once there is a mechanism to report this to the front end.
>
Sure, that's on my TODO list.
Wei.
--
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