netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] packet: respect devices with LLTX flag in direct xmit

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <53389204.2010205@redhat.com>
Date:	Sun, 30 Mar 2014 23:52:04 +0200
From:	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	brouer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] packet: respect devices with LLTX flag in direct
 xmit

On 03/29/2014 04:02 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 22:13 +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 03/28/2014 09:50 PM, David Miller wrote:
>
>>> The only remaining issue is that Eric seems to suggest that a tx
>>> dropped counter bump should be added.  Please submit that as a
>>> follow-on if my reading of his feedback is accurate.
>>
>> Yes, will do next week. I think at time of submission we didn't
>> have that yet. :)
>
> BTW, how direct xmit performs in case of BQL enabled driver ?
>
> dummy is nice, but not really representative of real device ;)
>
> netif_xmit_frozen_or_stopped() tests (dev_queue->state &
> QUEUE_STATE_ANY_XOFF_OR_FROZEN), so will not fill TX ring.
>
> Since you have no queue, I would rather use a test without
> BQL bit (1 << __QUEUE_STATE_STACK_XOFF), so that you can absorb bursts
> into TX ring ...

Thanks Eric, I'll look into it on next Tuesday [I was on travel
whole weekend and will be on Monday].
--
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