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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 15:31:11 -0400 From: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Cc: raghuram.kothakota@...cle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] sunvnet: Packet processing in non-interrupt context. On (10/06/14 15:25), David Miller wrote: > > > But we still need to hold the vio lock around the ldc_write > > (and also around dring write) in vnet_start_xmit, right? > > You might be able to avoid it, you're fully serialized by the TX queue > lock. yes, I was just noticing that. The only place where I believe I need to hold the vio spin-lock is to sync with the dr->cons checks (the "should I send a start_cons LDC message?" check in vnet_start_xmit() vs the vnet_ack() updates). But isn't it better in general to declare NETIF_F_LLTX and have finer lock granularity in the driver? --Sowmini -- 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