netdev - RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net v3 2/6] idpf: improve when to set RE bit logic

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: <SJ1PR11MB62976B7481025CDC109B71D49B2BA@SJ1PR11MB6297.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 16:45:26 +0000
From: "Salin, Samuel" <samuel.salin@...el.com>
To: "Hay, Joshua A" <joshua.a.hay@...el.com>,
	"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "Hay, Joshua A"
	<joshua.a.hay@...el.com>, Luigi Rizzo <lrizzo@...gle.com>, Brian Vazquez
	<brianvv@...gle.com>, "Chittim, Madhu" <madhu.chittim@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net v3 2/6] idpf: improve when to
 set RE bit logic



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan-bounces@...osl.org> On Behalf Of
> Joshua Hay
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2025 11:42 AM
> To: intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; Hay, Joshua A <joshua.a.hay@...el.com>; Luigi
> Rizzo <lrizzo@...gle.com>; Brian Vazquez <brianvv@...gle.com>; Chittim,
> Madhu <madhu.chittim@...el.com>
> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net v3 2/6] idpf: improve when to set RE
> bit logic
> 
> Track the gap between next_to_use and the last RE index. Set RE again if the
> gap is large enough to ensure RE bit is set frequently. This is critical before
> removing the stashing mechanisms because the opportunistic descriptor ring
> cleaning from the out-of-order completions will go away. Previously the
> descriptors would be "cleaned" by both the descriptor (RE) completion and
> the out-of-order completions. Without the latter, we must ensure the RE bit is
> set more frequently. Otherwise, it's theoretically possible for the descriptor
> ring next_to_clean to never advance.  The previous implementation was
> dependent on the start of a packet falling on a 64th index in the descriptor
> ring, which is not guaranteed with large packets.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luigi Rizzo <lrizzo@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Brian Vazquez <brianvv@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Joshua Hay <joshua.a.hay@...el.com>
> Reviewed-by: Madhu Chittim <madhu.chittim@...el.com>
> ---
> 2.39.2

Tested-by: Samuel Salin <Samuel.salin@...el.com>