netdev - Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 0/2] mv88e6xxx: Add MAB offload 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]

Date:   Tue, 15 Nov 2022 19:40:02 +0100
From:   netdev@...io-technology.com
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
        kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 0/2] mv88e6xxx: Add MAB offload support

On 2022-11-15 17:18, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 05:03:01PM +0100, netdev@...io-technology.com 
> wrote:
>> Yes, so you want me to simply increase the 50ms on line 58 in smi.c...
>> 
>> I have now tried to increase it even to 10000ms == 10s and it didn't 
>> help,
>> so something else must be needed...
> 
> Not only that, but also the one in mv88e6xxx_wait_mask().

So, I will not present you with a graph as it is a tedious process 
(probably
it is some descending gaussian curve wrt timeout occurring).

But 100ms fails, 125 I had 1 port fail, at 140, 150  and 180 I saw 
timeouts
resulting in fdb add fails, like (and occasional port fail):

mv88e6085 1002b000.ethernet-1:04: Timeout while waiting for switch
mv88e6085 1002b000.ethernet-1:04: port 0 failed to add be:7c:96:06:9f:09 
vid 1 to fdb: -110

At around 200 ms it looks like it is getting stable (like 5 runs, no 
problems).

So with the gaussian curve tail whipping ones behind (risque of failure) 
it
might need to be like 300 ms in my case... :-)