| 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: <20250425174251.59d7a45d@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 17:42:51 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Samiullah Khawaja <skhawaja@...gle.com> Cc: "David S . Miller " <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, almasrymina@...gle.com, willemb@...gle.com, jdamato@...tly.com, mkarsten@...terloo.ca, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5] Add support to set napi threaded for individual napi On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 20:14:13 +0000 Samiullah Khawaja wrote: > A net device has a threaded sysctl that can be used to enable threaded > napi polling on all of the NAPI contexts under that device. Allow > enabling threaded napi polling at individual napi level using netlink. > > Extend the netlink operation `napi-set` and allow setting the threaded > attribute of a NAPI. This will enable the threaded polling on a napi > context. I think I haven't replied to you on the config recommendation about how global vs per-object config should behave. I implemented the suggested scheme for rx-buf-len to make sure its not a crazy ask: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250421222827.283737-1-kuba@kernel.org/ and I do like it more. Joe, Stanislav and Mina all read that series and are CCed here. What do y'all think? Should we make the threaded config work like the rx-buf-len, if user sets it on a NAPI it takes precedence over global config? Or stick to the simplistic thing of last write wins?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists