netdev - Re: r8169 regression: UDP packets dropped intermittantly

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: <20151123001650.GG2957@marvin.atrad.com.au>
Date:	Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:46:50 +1030
From:	Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@...ad.com.au>
To:	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: r8169 regression: UDP packets dropped intermittantly

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 11:45:34PM +0100, Francois Romieu wrote:
> The hardware stats are not exactly clear. Is the initial Tx - Rx packet
> difference (6) at the hardware stats level expected ?

Sorry, I missed this question earlier.  When speaking to the external
device, each UDP command packet that's sent should be balanced with a
response.  However, if a UDP command is sent to a device that's not on (or
there's a typo with the address) then obviously that transmitted packet will
never be responded to.  I expect something like this could easily have
happened during the session in which I ran that test for you, so in that
case would be explainable.

I note that the difference did increase to 7 at the 1447985726.272550987 
mark.  Since this was during the test I can't quite explain that one, unless
something else on the system happened to send a UDP packet out onto that
interface which was not responded to.

Regards
  jonathan
--
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