netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH] ip: re-introduce fragments cache worker

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

Message-ID: <3afc43f5-f13a-1790-7558-36f6b6d4d2a4@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 9 Jul 2018 04:39:55 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ip: re-introduce fragments cache worker



On 07/09/2018 04:34 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> and number of tx queues? 
> 
> You seem to self inflict losses on the sender, and that is terrible for the
> (convoluted) stress test you want to run.
> 
> I use mq + fq : no losses on the sender.
> 
> Do not send patches to solve a problem that does not exist on the field.
> 
> If some customers are using netperf and UDP_STREAM with frags, just tell them to
> use TCP instead :)
> 

Alternatively, you could try to patch fq_codel to drop all frags of one UDP datagram
instead of few of them.