netdev - Re: [PATCH -next 2/2] virtio_net: Read the advised MTU

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <575074C3.8040908@hpe.com>
Date:	Thu, 2 Jun 2016 11:02:43 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@....com>
To:	Aaron Conole <aconole@...hat.com>
Cc:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 2/2] virtio_net: Read the advised MTU

On 06/02/2016 10:06 AM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> Rick Jones <rick.jones2@....com> writes:
>> One of the things I've been doing has been setting-up a cluster
>> (OpenStack) with JumboFrames, and then setting MTUs on instance vNICs
>> by hand to measure different MTU sizes.  It would be a shame if such a
>> thing were not possible in the future.  Keeping a warning if shrinking
>> the MTU would be good, leave the error (perhaps) to if an attempt is
>> made to go beyond the advised value.
>
> This was cut because it didn't make sense for such a warning to
> be issued, but it seems like perhaps you may want such a feature?  I
> agree with Michael, after thinking about it, that I don't know what sort
> of use the warning would serve.  After all, if you're changing the MTU,
> you must have wanted such a change to occur?

I don't need a warning, was simply willing to live with one when 
shrinking the MTU.  Didn't want an error.

happy benchmarking,

rick jones