netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ipv6: ioam: Support for Queue depth data field

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: <331558573.246297129.1640519271432.JavaMail.zimbra@uliege.be>
Date:   Sun, 26 Dec 2021 12:47:51 +0100 (CET)
From:   Justin Iurman <justin.iurman@...ege.be>
To:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        dsahern@...nel.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ipv6: ioam: Support for Queue depth data
 field

On Dec 24, 2021, at 6:53 PM, Ido Schimmel idosch@...sch.org wrote:
> Why 'qlen' is used and not 'backlog'? From the paragraph you quoted it
> seems that queue depth needs to take into account the size of the
> enqueued packets, not only their number.

The quoted paragraph contains the following sentence:

   "The queue depth is expressed as the current amount of memory
    buffers used by the queue"

So my understanding is that we need their number, not their size.

> Did you check what other IOAM implementations (SW/HW) report for queue
> depth? I would assume that they report bytes.

Unfortunately, IOAM is quite new, and so IOAM implementations don't
grow on trees. The Linux kernel implementation is one of the first,
except for VPP and IOS (Cisco) which did not implement the queue
depth data field.