netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] sunvnet: Packet processing in non-interrupt context.

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: <20141001.161508.1823792090990427608.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 01 Oct 2014 16:15:08 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com
Cc:	raghuram.kothakota@...cle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] sunvnet: Packet processing in
 non-interrupt context.

From: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 15:55:35 -0400

> On 10/01/2014 03:50 PM, David Miller wrote:
> 
>>>
>>>     A BH Rx handler is a simpler way to avoid the weaknesses of processing
>>>     packets in LDC interrupt context, and also provides Rx load-spreading
>>>     across multiple CPUs.
>>
>> I think you want to re-evaluate this considering napi_gro_receive()
>> which
>> is what you should really be calling in a NAPI driver.
> 
> 
> Sorry I dont follow the suggestion.
> 
> If I make this a NAPI driver that uses napi_gro_receive, I would
> still have to deal with a budget, right?

Absolutely, and YOU MUST, because the budget keeps one device from
hogging the RX packet input path from other devices on a given cpu.
--
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