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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20230501100930.eemwoxmwh7oenhvb@skbuf> Date: Mon, 1 May 2023 13:09:30 +0300 From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> To: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@...nc9.com> Cc: DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>, Greg Ungerer <gerg@...nel.org>, Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>, Richard van Schagen <richard@...terhints.com>, Richard van Schagen <vschagen@...com>, Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@...lic-files.de>, mithat.guner@...ont.com, erkin.bozoglu@...ont.com, bartel.eerdekens@...stell8.be, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: MT7530 bug, forward broadcast and unknown frames to the correct CPU port On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:52:12PM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote: > On 29.04.2023 21:56, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 09:39:41PM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote: > > > Are you fine with the preferred port patch now that I mentioned port 6 > > > would be preferred for MT7531BE since it's got 2.5G whilst port 5 has > > > got 1G? Would you like to submit it or leave it to me to send the diff > > > above and this? > > > > No, please tell me: what real life difference would it make to a user > > who doesn't care to analyze which CPU port is used? > > They would get 2.5 Gbps download/upload bandwidth in total to the CPU, > instead of 1 Gbps. 3 computers connected to 3 switch ports would each get > 833 Mbps download/upload speed to/from the CPU instead of 333 Mbps. In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they aren't. Are you able to obtain 833 Mbps concurrently over 3 user ports?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists