netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tommy Christensen <tommy.christensen@tpack.net>
To: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Cc: "'netdev@oss.sgi.com'" <netdev@oss.sgi.com>,
	"Linux 802.1Q VLAN" <vlan@candelatech.com>,
	Francois Romieu <romieu@fr.zoreil.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]  802.1Q VLAN
Date: 29 Oct 2004 10:29:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1099038566.1813.99.camel@cyan.cph.tpack.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41818D99.9020300@candelatech.com>

On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 02:23, Ben Greear wrote:
> >  o It is considered an error if a queue-less device returns anything but 
> > zero from its
> >    hard_start_xmit() function (see dev_queue_xmit()).
> 
> This certainly was not clear to me.  The comments in dev_queue_xmit are
> wrong about the return value (failure cases can be > zero too).  Are
> there other errors or ommissions there?

A return value > zero doesn't mean failure. It indicates congestion.

> What sorts of things go wrong if you do return an error here when you don't
> have a queue?

It is interpreted as a tx failure rather than congestion. So it doesn't
help the upper layers like you wanted it to.
And it spews out an error message.

> 
> >  o So, lets add a tx queue to it. Sure, that would be nice. Now we can 
> > even do shaping
> >    and other fancy stuff. But then how do we manage netif_queue_stopped? 
> > Especially
> >    restarting the queue could be tricky.
> 
> Right... it would probably be an O(N) thing to wake the queues for all virtual
> devices on a physical device, and we certainly don't want to do that
> often.  Maybe if you only tried to wake the blocked queues (ie, kept a list
> of just blocked queues), then that would be less painful on average,
> but the worst-case is still bad.

Yeah, we probably would need some sort of notification from the
qdisc of the underlying device when it can accept packets again.

> >  o But couldn't we skip netif_stop_queue() and just return 
> > NETDEV_TX_BUSY when congested?
> >    No, that would make the qdisc system "busy-retry" untill it succeeds. 
> > BAD.
> > 
> >  o It is unsafe to pass a shared skb to dev_queue_xmit() unless you 
> > control all the
> >    references yourself. (It will likely be enqueued on a list.)
> 
> Since we either free the duplicate copy, or pass it to the queue and forget
> about it, this last point does not matter in the patch I submitted, right?

Yes. This is the right way to do it. *Unless* the skb is already shared
when you receive it (e.g. from pktgen).

> > And specifically for this patch:
> > 
> >  o The skb could be freed (replaced) in __vlan_put_tag(), so you cannot 
> > tell the caller
> >    to hang on to it.
> 
> Yep, that is quite nasty...I had not noticed.  If I kept a copy of the original
> pointer (using skb_get() to bump the reference) passed in,
> that would fix this particular problem?

Yes, I would think so.

> >  o If rv is NET_XMIT_CN (and probably also rv < 0) you have to return 0, 
> > in order to
> >    make the caller forget about this skb.
> 
> Is there a complete list of what return codes are possible?  Maybe we could make
> it return an enum instead of an integer so we can more easily track these
> sorts of things down??

They are listed in netdevice.h - NET_XMIT_SUCCESS etc., and the usual
negative errno's.

> Thanks for noticing!
> Ben

-Tommy

  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-10-29  8:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-22 21:07 [PATCH] 802.1Q VLAN Ben Greear
2004-10-22 21:46 ` Francois Romieu
2004-10-22 22:09   ` Ben Greear
2004-10-23  0:24     ` Francois Romieu
2004-10-25 20:51     ` Ben Greear
2004-10-25 23:56       ` Ben Greear
2004-10-27  1:02         ` David S. Miller
2004-10-27 23:49         ` David S. Miller
2004-10-28  1:28           ` Ben Greear
2004-10-28  4:42             ` David S. Miller
2004-10-28 23:40       ` Tommy Christensen
2004-10-28 23:35         ` David S. Miller
2004-10-29  0:23         ` Ben Greear
2004-10-29  0:38           ` Krzysztof Halasa
2004-10-29  8:29           ` Tommy Christensen [this message]
2004-10-29 17:45             ` Ben Greear
2004-10-29 23:37               ` Tommy Christensen
2004-10-29 23:56                 ` Ben Greear
2004-10-30  0:05                 ` Ben Greear
2004-10-30  0:31                   ` Tommy Christensen
2004-11-01 18:58                     ` Ben Greear
2004-11-01 23:08                       ` Tommy Christensen

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=1099038566.1813.99.camel@cyan.cph.tpack.net \
    --to=tommy.christensen@tpack.net \
    --cc=davem@redhat.com \
    --cc=greearb@candelatech.com \
    --cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=romieu@fr.zoreil.com \
    --cc=vlan@candelatech.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).