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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 10:24:20 -0800 From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> Cc: Hans Westgaard Ry <hans.westgaard.ry@...cle.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>, Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>, Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Linus Lüssing <linus.luessing@...3.blue>, Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Alexey Kodanev <alexey.kodanev@...cle.com>, Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@...cle.com>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net:Add sysctl_max_skb_frags On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2016-02-03 at 09:43 -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote: > >> Read the history. I still say it is best if we don't accept a partial >> solution. If we are going to introduce the sysctl as a core item it >> should function as a core item and not as something that belongs to >> TCP only. > > > But this patch is the base, adding both the core sysctl and its first > usage. > > Do we really need to split it in 2 patches ? Really ? > > The goal is to use it in all skb providers were it might be a > performance gain, once they are identified. That is what I thought. So why are we trying to sell this as a core change then. All I am asking for is the sysctl to be moved and renamed since based on all of your descriptions this clearly only impacts TCP. > Your points were already raised and will be addressed, by either me or > you. And maybe others. Please don't sign me up for work I didn't volunteer for. I already have enough broken code to try and fix. I'm pretty sure I need to go in and fix the gso_max_size code for starters. If this is only meant to be a performance modification and is only really targeted at TCP TSO/GRO then all I ask is that we use a name like tcp_max_gso_frags and relocate the sysctl to the TCP section. Otherwise if we are actually going to try to scope this out on a wider level and limit all frags which is what the name implies then the patch set needs to make a better attempt at covering all cases where it may apply. - Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists