netdev - Re: [RFC 1/2] net/ethtool: Add new coalescing parameter for queue

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: <56671E59.40402@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 08 Dec 2015 10:15:53 -0800
From:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:	kan.liang@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	bwh@...nel.org
CC:	jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, andi@...stfloor.org,
	alexander.duyck@...il.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
	shannon.nelson@...el.com, carolyn.wyborny@...el.com,
	donald.c.skidmore@...el.com, mitch.a.williams@...el.com,
	ogerlitz@...lanox.com, edumazet@...gle.com, jiri@...lanox.com,
	sfeldma@...il.com, gospo@...ulusnetworks.com,
	sasha.levin@...cle.com, dsahern@...il.com, tj@...nel.org,
	cascardo@...hat.com, corbet@....net
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] net/ethtool: Add new coalescing parameter for queue

On 07/12/15 20:42, kan.liang@...el.com wrote:
> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
> 
> Intrdouce "queue" option for coalesce getting and setting.
> For coalesce getting, only the coalescing parameters from specific
> queue will be passed to user space.
> For coalesce setting, the coalescing parameters will only be applied to
> specific queue.
> If the queue is set to -1, the coalescing parameters will apply to all
> queues.

This looks like a good start, but there are a few things that need to be
clarified, in particular:

- if the number of TX and RX queues differ, but the ethtool coalesce
structure contains parameters that affect both the RX and TX side, and
the queue number is invalid/non-existent for one of these sides, what is
the expected outcome? Same question with specifying a queue number, with
RX queue N not belonging to the same queue pair as TX queue N?

- from an user perspective do we want to iterate over all queues to set
their parameters, or should we have a queue bitmask parameter which
allows setting them with the same settings in one shot? What would be
the appropriate bitmask size then (32-bits with 16-bits for TX and
16-bits for RX might be too small)?

Thanks
-- 
Florian
--
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