netdev - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net v2 1/3] xen-netback: move NAPI add/remove calls

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: <20140811140843.GG3249@zion.uk.xensource.com>
Date:	Mon, 11 Aug 2014 15:08:43 +0100
From:	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
To:	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
CC:	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>,
	Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@...rix.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
	<xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net v2 1/3] xen-netback: move NAPI add/remove
 calls

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 02:59:52PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 11/08/14 14:43, Wei Liu wrote:
> > In short, there's no need to reorder disconnect logic and no need have a
> > dedicated loop for netif_napi_del.
> 
> Not for now.  But I would prefer it if it was re-ordered.  And similarly
> in xenvif_down(), irq_disable() should be before napi_disable().
> 

Something for another day then. In any case, even if napi_disable goes
before irq_disable, it's still safe if a tx interrupt takes place in
between. napi_schedule has no effect on a disabled instance.

Wei.

> David
--
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