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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 13:31:59 +0100 From: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@...rix.com> To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org> CC: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>, "Ian Campbell" <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netback: Turn off the carrier if the guest is not able to receive On 08/08/14 17:33, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > This idea of bouncing carrier is wrong. If guest is flow blocked you don't > want to toggle carrier. That will cause problems because applications that are > looking for carrier transistions like routing daemons will be notified. > > If running a routing daemon this will also lead to link flapping which > is very bad and cause lots of other work for peer routing daemons. > > Carrier is not a suitable flow control mechanism. > Hi, Indeed, I also had some concerns about using carrier state to solve this problem, as the notifier can kick a lot of things, and flapping is not impossible. That's why the frontend has 10 seconds by default to do something. Practice shows that if a frontend can't do any receive work for that time, it is unlikely it will be able to do it soon. So worst case carrier flapping can happen only in every 10 seconds, I think that's manageable. I think the majority of the users have simple bridged setups where this carrier change doesn't start any expensive operation. The reason we choose carrier change for this purpose because we needed something which ditched everything in QDisc and made sure nothing will be queued up there until there is a chance we can transmit to the guest. Calling dev_deactivate straight away seemed less appropriate. Regards, Zoltan -- 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