netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] r8169: set IRQF_NO

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: <20201102154132.gfcd5t5fo4oupmre@skbuf>
Date:   Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:41:32 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] r8169: set IRQF_NO_THREAD if MSI(X) is enabled

On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 04:18:07PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> According to my understanding the point is that executing the simple
> hard irq handler for NAPI drivers doesn't cost significantly more than
> executing the default hard irq handler (irq_default_primary_handler).
> Therefore threadifying it means more or less just overhead.

If that is really true, then sure. You could probably run a cyclictest
under a ping flood just to make sure though.