netdev - Re: TX vs RX pause frame question

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: <1490562506.3177.59.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
Date:   Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:08:26 +1100
From:   Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TX vs RX pause frame question

On Sun, 2017-03-26 at 10:55 -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> On 17-03-26 03:11 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > Hi !
> > 
> > It's not 100% clear to me looking at various drivers what is
> > considered "rx_pause" and what is "tx_pause" (from the ethtool
> > terminology).
> > 
> > Is "rx_pause" about receiving pause frame to throttle the transmitter
> > or is it about sending pause frames when the receiver gets full ?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Ben.
> > 
> 
> The common implementation, at least on the Intel devices, is rx_pause
> should be enabled so the device will respond to receiving a pause frame, e.g.
> stop sending packets. And tx_pause is for enabling/disabling sending of
> pause frames.

Thanks, I'll have my driver match that.

Cheers,
Ben.