netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] net: virtio_net: notifications coalescing support

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: <CAJs=3_BNvrJo9JCkMhL3G2TBescrLbgeD7eOx=cs+T9YOLTwLg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Jul 2022 09:53:40 +0300
From:   Alvaro Karsz <alvaro.karsz@...id-run.com>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: virtio_net: notifications coalescing support

Thanks Jakub and Jason.

> I think we need to return -EBUSY here regardless whether or not
> interrupt coalescing is negotiated.

The part you are referring to is relevant only if we are going to update NAPI.
Jakub suggested splitting the function into 2 cases.

If interrupt coalescing is negotiated:
 Send control commands to the device.
Otherwise:
 Update NAPI.

So this is not relevant if interrupt coalescing is negotiated.
You don't think that we should separate the function into 2 different cases?

Or maybe I misunderstood you, and you are not referring to the following part:
> +                             if (!notf_coal)
> +                                     return -EBUSY;
> +
> +                             goto exit;

But you are referring to the whole virtnet_set_coalesce function in general.

Alvaro.