netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v1 0/2] Threaded NAPI configurability

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: <20210506151837.27373dc3@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 May 2021 15:18:37 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Yannick Vignon <yannick.vignon@....nxp.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Antoine Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>,
        Wei Wang <weiwan@...gle.com>, Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>,
        Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@...me>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
        Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@....com>,
        sebastien.laveze@....nxp.com,
        Yannick Vignon <yannick.vignon@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v1 0/2] Threaded NAPI configurability

On Thu,  6 May 2021 19:20:19 +0200 Yannick Vignon wrote:
> The purpose of these 2 patches is to be able to configure the scheduling
> properties (e.g. affinity, priority...) of the NAPI threads more easily
> at run-time, based on the hardware queues each thread is handling.
> The main goal is really to expose which thread does what, as the current
> naming doesn't exactly make that clear.
> 
> Posting this as an RFC in case people have different opinions on how to
> do that.

WQ <-> CQ <-> irq <-> napi mapping needs an exhaustive netlink
interface. We've been saying this for a while. Neither hard coded
naming schemes nor one-off sysfs files are a great idea IMHO.