[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iJT+BUfY9QCh60zZEst0tM5jq9BxyfPcq8bbkOm64H90Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2025 08:25:49 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 3/4] net: add /proc/sys/net/core/txq_reselection_ms
control
On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 8:21 AM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/8/25 12:46 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > @@ -667,6 +667,13 @@ static struct ctl_table netns_core_table[] = {
> > .extra2 = SYSCTL_ONE,
> > .proc_handler = proc_dou8vec_minmax,
> > },
> > + {
> > + .procname = "txq_reselection_ms",
> > + .data = &init_net.core.sysctl_txq_reselection,
> > + .maxlen = sizeof(int),
> > + .mode = 0644,
> > + .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_ms_jiffies,
>
> Do we need a min value to avoid syzbot or some users tripping on bad values?
I was thinking about accepting all values. I do not think syzbot would
find any issue here,
even on a 32bit host.
0 could be the value to disable the feature, instead of
echo 2147483647 >/proc/sys/net/core/txq_reselection_ms
Powered by blists - more mailing lists