From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755569Ab3CDIUI (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Mar 2013 03:20:08 -0500 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:42011 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755373Ab3CDIUG (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Mar 2013 03:20:06 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,777,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="293163305" Message-ID: <5134592E.6050508@linux.intel.com> Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 10:19:58 +0200 From: Eliezer Tamir User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130215 Thunderbird/17.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cong Wang CC: Eliezer Tamir , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Dave Miller , Jesse Brandeburg , e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Willem de Bruijn , Andi Kleen , HPA , Eliezer Tamir Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] net: low latency Ethernet device polling References: <20130227175549.10611.82188.stgit@gitlad.jf.intel.com> <51344F54.8060809@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51344F54.8060809@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/03/2013 09:37, Cong Wang wrote: > On 02/28/2013 01:55 AM, Eliezer Tamir wrote: >> >> Open issues: >> 1. Find a way to avoid the need to change the sk and skb structs. >> One big disadvantage of how we do this right now is that when a device is >> removed, it's hard to prevent it from getting polled by a socket >> which holds a stale reference. >> >> 2. How do we decide which sockets are eligible to do busy polling? >> Do we add a socket option to control this? >> How do we provide sane defaults while allowing flexibility and >> performance? >> >> 3. Andi Kleen and HPA pointed out that using get_cycles() is not >> portable. >> >> 4. How and where do we call ndo_ll_poll from the socket code? >> One good place seems to be wherever the kernel puts the process to sleep, >> waiting for more data, but this makes doing something intelligent about >> poll (the system call) hard. From the perspective of how ndo_ll_poll >> itself is implemented this does not seem to matter. >> >> 5. I would like to hear suggestions on naming conventions and where >> to put the code that for now I have put in include/net/ll_poll.h >> > > > A dumb question: is bypassing tcpdump/netfilters/qdisc etc. what we > always want? Isn't this a security issue? We are not bypassing any of the regular stack checks/hooks, we call the normal netif_rx_skb(). Thanks, Eliezer