netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: fec: select queue depending on VLAN priority

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6965c0828bb5294faa471af10865a388@agner.ch>
Date:   Tue, 09 May 2017 21:51:09 -0700
From:   Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     fugang.duan@....com, andrew@...n.ch, festevam@...il.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: fec: select queue depending on VLAN priority

On 2017-05-09 06:39, David Miller wrote:
> From: Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>
> Date: Mon,  8 May 2017 22:37:08 -0700
> 
>> Since the addition of the multi queue code with commit 59d0f7465644
>> ("net: fec: init multi queue date structure") the queue selection
>> has been handelt by the default transmit queue selection
>> implementation which tries to evenly distribute the traffic across
>> all available queues. This selection presumes that the queues are
>> using an equal priority, however, the queues 1 and 2 are actually
>> of higher priority (the classification of the queues is enabled in
>> fec_enet_enable_ring).
>>
>> This can lead to net scheduler warnings and continuous TX ring
>> dumps when exercising the system with iperf.
>>
>> Use only queue 0 for all common traffic (no VLAN and P802.1p
>> priority 0 and 1) and route level 2-7 through queue 1 and 2.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fugang Duan <fugang.duan@....com>
>> Fixes: 59d0f7465644 ("net: fec: init multi queue date structure")
> 
> If the queues are used for prioritization, and it does not have
> multiple normal priority level queues, multiqueue is not what the
> driver should have implemented.

As Andy mentioned, there is also a round-robin mode. I'll try that.

What would be the proper way to use the prioritized queues?

--
Stefan