All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
To: Bart De Schuymer <bdschuym@pandora.be>
Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com, bridge@osdl.org, snort2004@mail.ru,
	rusty@rustcorp.com.au, dwmw2@infradead.org, ak@suse.de,
	shemminger@osdl.org
Subject: [Bridge] Re: do_IRQ: stack overflow: 872..
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:57:35 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050118135735.4b77d38d.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1105133241.3375.16.camel@localhost.localdomain>

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 22:27:21 +0100
Bart De Schuymer <bdschuym@pandora.be> wrote:

> How about something like the patch below (untested but compiles)?
> The current netfilter scheme adds one function call to the call chain
> for each NF_HOOK and NF_HOOK_THRESH. This can be prevented by executing
> the okfn in the calling function instead of in nf_hook_slow().
> I didn't check if there's any code that actually uses the return value
> from NF_HOOK. If so, this patch won't work well in its current form as -
> EPERM is now also returned for NF_QUEUE and NF_STOLEN.
> 
> Another 2 calls of okfn can be postponed in br_netfilter.c by adding
> NF_STOP, which would work like NF_STOLEN except that okfn is still
> called. But I'd first like to get the IPv4/IPv6 fix for br_netfilter.c
> accepted (see another thread on netdev).

I believe I put in your ipv4/ipv6 br_netfilter fix already.

This NF_HOOK() change looks interesting.  Could we also do something like
running the deeper ->hard_start_xmit() via a triggered tasklet or something
similar?

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
To: Bart De Schuymer <bdschuym@pandora.be>
Cc: shemminger@osdl.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, ak@suse.de,
	snort2004@mail.ru, bridge@osdl.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com,
	rusty@rustcorp.com.au
Subject: Re: do_IRQ: stack overflow: 872..
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:57:35 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050118135735.4b77d38d.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1105133241.3375.16.camel@localhost.localdomain>

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 22:27:21 +0100
Bart De Schuymer <bdschuym@pandora.be> wrote:

> How about something like the patch below (untested but compiles)?
> The current netfilter scheme adds one function call to the call chain
> for each NF_HOOK and NF_HOOK_THRESH. This can be prevented by executing
> the okfn in the calling function instead of in nf_hook_slow().
> I didn't check if there's any code that actually uses the return value
> from NF_HOOK. If so, this patch won't work well in its current form as -
> EPERM is now also returned for NF_QUEUE and NF_STOLEN.
> 
> Another 2 calls of okfn can be postponed in br_netfilter.c by adding
> NF_STOP, which would work like NF_STOLEN except that okfn is still
> called. But I'd first like to get the IPv4/IPv6 fix for br_netfilter.c
> accepted (see another thread on netdev).

I believe I put in your ipv4/ipv6 br_netfilter fix already.

This NF_HOOK() change looks interesting.  Could we also do something like
running the deeper ->hard_start_xmit() via a triggered tasklet or something
similar?

  reply	other threads:[~2005-01-18 21:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1131604877.20041218092730@mail.ru.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2004-12-18  7:50 ` do_IRQ: stack overflow: 872 Andi Kleen
2004-12-18 11:12   ` Bart De Schuymer
2004-12-18 11:14     ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-18 11:51       ` Bart De Schuymer
2004-12-18 13:53         ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-18 16:07           ` Re[2]: " Crazy AMD K7
2004-12-18 16:46             ` Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-07 17:05   ` David Woodhouse
2005-01-07 18:00     ` [Bridge] " Stephen Hemminger
2005-01-07 18:00       ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-01-07 18:06       ` [Bridge] " David Woodhouse
2005-01-07 18:06         ` David Woodhouse
2005-01-07 21:27       ` [Bridge] " Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-07 21:27         ` Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-18 21:57         ` David S. Miller [this message]
2005-01-18 21:57           ` David S. Miller
2005-01-22 22:30           ` [Bridge] [PATCH/RFC] Reduce call chain length in netfilter (was: Re: do_IRQ: stack overflow: 872..) Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-22 22:30             ` Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-22 23:22             ` [Bridge] " Martin Josefsson
2005-01-22 23:22               ` Martin Josefsson
2005-01-23 12:40               ` [Bridge] " Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-23 12:40                 ` Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-23 16:08                 ` [Bridge] " Martin Josefsson
2005-01-23 16:08                   ` Martin Josefsson
2005-01-26  6:05                   ` [Bridge] " David S. Miller
2005-01-26  6:05                     ` David S. Miller
2005-01-26  9:08                     ` [Bridge] " Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-26  9:08                       ` Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-26 23:49                       ` [Bridge] Re: [PATCH/RFC] Reduce call chain length in netfilter Patrick McHardy
2005-01-26 23:49                         ` Patrick McHardy
2005-01-27  7:18                         ` [Bridge] " David S. Miller
2005-01-27  7:18                           ` David S. Miller
2005-01-27 17:50                           ` [Bridge] " Patrick McHardy
2005-01-27 17:50                             ` Patrick McHardy
2005-01-27 19:47                             ` [Bridge] " David S. Miller
2005-01-27 19:47                               ` David S. Miller
2005-01-27 21:16                               ` [Bridge] " Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-27 21:16                                 ` Bart De Schuymer
2005-01-27 22:48                               ` [Bridge] " Patrick McHardy
2005-01-27 22:48                                 ` Patrick McHardy
2005-01-27 23:24                                 ` [Bridge] " David S. Miller
2005-01-27 23:24                                   ` David S. Miller
2005-01-28  0:08                                   ` [Bridge] " Patrick McHardy
2005-01-28  0:08                                     ` Patrick McHardy
2005-01-28  0:29                                   ` [Bridge] " Rusty Russell
2005-01-28  0:29                                     ` Rusty Russell
2005-01-28  1:10                                     ` [Bridge] " David S. Miller
2005-01-28  1:10                                       ` David S. Miller
2005-01-28  1:32                                       ` [Bridge] " Rusty Russell
2005-01-28  1:32                                         ` Rusty Russell
2005-01-28  1:35                                         ` [Bridge] " Patrick McHardy
2005-01-28  1:35                                           ` Patrick McHardy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20050118135735.4b77d38d.davem@davemloft.net \
    --to=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=bdschuym@pandora.be \
    --cc=bridge@osdl.org \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=shemminger@osdl.org \
    --cc=snort2004@mail.ru \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.