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: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 15:03:00 +0300 From: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> Cc: Yuval Mintz <Yuval.Mintz@...gic.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>, Mohamad Haj Yahia <mohamad@...lanox.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: poll tx timeout only on active tx queues On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2016-07-01 at 04:50 +0000, Yuval Mintz wrote: >> > currently all the device driver call netif_tx_start_all_queues(dev) >> > on open to W/A this issue. which is strange since only >> > real_num_tx_queues are active. >> >> You could also argue that netif_tx_start_all_queues() should >> only enable the real_num_tx_queues. >> [Although that would obviously cause all drivers to reach the >> 'problem' you're currently fixing]. > > Yep. Basically what I pointed out. > > It seems inconsistent to have loops using num_tx_queues, and others > using real_num_tx_queues. > > Instead of 'fixing' one of them, we should take a deeper look, even if > the change looks fine. > > num_tx_queues should be used in code that runs once, like > netdev_lockdep_set_classes(), but other loops should probably use > real_num_tx_queues. > > Anyway all these changes should definitely target net-next, not net > tree. > Thank you Eric and Yuval, Although i slightly disagree, this patch is good as is, even with the inconsistency, which is there due to a bad design. I don't' see why new drivers need to keep copy from old wrong implementations and workarounds. But for the long term, you have a point. We will consider a deeper fix for net-next as you suggested, and drop this temporary fix. Thanks Saeed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists