netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] virtio-net: use per-receive queue page frag alloc for mergeable bufs

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: <CANJ5vPLEV_Z-D-0tThwhWXbHVaRWOLv566Xk1eD4TNYqNvknHw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 26 Dec 2013 13:28:58 -0800
From:	Michael Dalton <mwdalton@...gle.com>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	lf-virt <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] virtio-net: use per-receive queue page frag
 alloc for mergeable bufs

On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> So there isn't a conflict with respect to locking.
>
> Is it problematic to use same page_frag with both GFP_ATOMIC and with
> GFP_KERNEL? If yes why?

I believe it is safe to use the same page_frag and I will send out a
followup patchset using just the per-receive page_frags. For future
consideration, Eric noted that disabling NAPI before GFP_KERNEL
allocs can potentially inhibit virtio-net network processing for some
time (e.g., during a blocking memory allocation or preemption).

Best,

Mike
--
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