* YOUR DIPLOMATIC PACKAGE
From: lewis251666 @ 2018-10-25 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netdev
Attention :
I'm Lewis Edward, I have been instructed to notify you of the
availability of a package deposited by your relative (our client)
in your name at the event of demise. We are entrusted and
empowered with diplomatic immunity and status to safe keep
valuable packages and baggage in trust for our reputable clients.
We work in collaboration with top firms and government bodies of
various countries as we have earned a reputation as a service
whose hallmarks in reliability and confidentiality are revered.
Our clienteles also includes international missions, fellow
diplomats as well as embassies of different countries.
A financial security package was deposited by a benefactor whose
identity can not be disclosed due to a binding Non-Disclosure
Agreement, specifically instructing us to contact you in the
event of demise. The Non Circumvention and Non Disclosure
Agreement signed with the benefactor mandates and authorises us
to fully divulge and disclose the benefactor's identity 18 months
after the beneficiary has received the funds. We confirm that
these funds are fully free of any liens or encumbrances and are
clean, clear and non-criminal origin and are available in the
form of
CASH.
By this notice, you are hereby advised to send your Full Contact
Information as well as the name of the closest airport to your
city in the format stated below. The funds with the
documentations of origin will be brought to your country of
residence by 3 Diplomats. You will be accompanied to your bank
(solely by your request) to deposit the funds in your name with
the documentations of its origin which authenticates the facts
that the funds are clean with no link to terrorism or drugs as
well as exonerates you from any form of investigations and
interrogation.
Kindly ensure that no mistake or error is made in the information
provide below and it should be forwarded in the manner stated
below:
Your Full Name: ______________________________
Your cell number:______________________________
Your Complete Address: ________________________________
Name of City of Residence: ____________________
Name of Closest Airport to your city of
Residence:_________________________________
I hereby confirm the the information provided above is correct
and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
Congratulations in advance.
Thank you and I sincerely Remain,
Lewis Edward
Email: opendoorssecurities1@webmail.co.za
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH net-next v8 28/28] net: WireGuard secure network tunnel
From: Andrew Lunn @ 2018-10-25 22:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason A. Donenfeld
Cc: LKML, Netdev, Linux Crypto Mailing List, David Miller,
Greg Kroah-Hartman
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9qMf=n7mnE-bsx86SVFBs1LrvHoc+nWrpr12vtYAgze+g@mail.gmail.com>
> > > +#if defined(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) && !defined(CONFIG_ANDROID)
> >
> > I don't see any other code which uses this combination. Why is this
> > needed?
>
> WireGuard clears private key material before going to sleep, so that
> ephemeral keys never live longer in ram than their expiration date.
> This works well for mostly everything, except Android devices where
> crazy out-of-tree wireless drivers (such as qcacld) will actually wake
> and sleep the phone constantly
Hi Jason
Out of tree is important here. To some degree, mainline does not care
about out of tree drivers. Putting in a bandaid for them does not help
get them fixed.
I would drop this bandaid. If the Android community decides to move
wireguard from mainline into their fork, they can put the bandaid back
in again, or get the driver fixed.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Regression: kernel 4.14 an later very slow with many ipsec tunnels
From: Florian Westphal @ 2018-10-25 22:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wolfgang Walter
Cc: netdev, Florian Westphal, Steffen Klassert, David Miller,
linux-kernel, torvalds, christophe.gouault, Greg KH
In-Reply-To: <2766296.15tpkxTHJV@stwm.de>
Wolfgang Walter <linux@stwm.de> wrote:
> there is now a new 4.19 which still has the big performance regression when
> many ipsec tunnels are configured (throughput and latency get worse by 10 to
> 50 times) which makes any kernel > 4.9 unusable for our routers.
https://git.breakpoint.cc/cgit/fw/net-next.git/log/?h=xfrm_pol_18
This is mostly untested, if you want to test this anyway and
find bugs please feel free to report them to me.
Improvements to test script in patch #1 welcome as well (its what
i've been using so far to test this).
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH net-next] net/ncsi: Add NCSI Mellanox OEM command
From: David Miller @ 2018-10-25 22:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: vijaykhemka
Cc: sam, netdev, linux-kernel, openbmc, Justin.Lee1, joel,
linux-aspeed
In-Reply-To: <20181025220413.2936698-1-vijaykhemka@fb.com>
From: Vijay Khemka <vijaykhemka@fb.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:04:13 -0700
> This patch adds OEM Mellanox commands and response handling. It also
> defines OEM Get MAC Address handler to get and configure the device.
>
> ncsi_oem_gma_handler_mlx: This handler send NCSI mellanox command for
> getting mac address.
> ncsi_rsp_handler_oem_mlx: This handles response received for all
> mellanox OEM commands.
> ncsi_rsp_handler_oem_mlx_gma: This handles get mac address response and
> set it to device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vijay Khemka <vijaykhemka@fb.com>
net-next is closed, please resubmit this when the net-next tree opens
back up.
Thank you.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH net-next v8 28/28] net: WireGuard secure network tunnel
From: Andrew Lunn @ 2018-10-25 22:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason A. Donenfeld
Cc: LKML, Netdev, Linux Crypto Mailing List, David Miller,
Greg Kroah-Hartman
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9qMf=n7mnE-bsx86SVFBs1LrvHoc+nWrpr12vtYAgze+g@mail.gmail.com>
> > > +static void kdf(u8 *first_dst, u8 *second_dst, u8 *third_dst, const u8 *data,
> > > + size_t first_len, size_t second_len, size_t third_len,
> > > + size_t data_len, const u8 chaining_key[NOISE_HASH_LEN])
> > > +{
> > > + u8 output[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE + 1];
> > > + u8 secret[BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE];
> > > +
> > > + WARN_ON(IS_ENABLED(DEBUG) &&
> > > + (first_len > BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE ||
> > > + second_len > BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE ||
> > > + third_len > BLAKE2S_HASH_SIZE ||
> > > + ((second_len || second_dst || third_len || third_dst) &&
> > > + (!first_len || !first_dst)) ||
> > > + ((third_len || third_dst) && (!second_len || !second_dst))));
> >
> > Maybe split this up into a number of WARN_ON()s. At the moment, if it
> > fires, you have little idea why, there are so many comparisons. Also,
> > is this on the hot path? I guess not, since this is keys, not
> > packets. Do you need to care about DEBUG here?
>
> This is on the hot path, actually. Well, it's not on path of data
> packets, but I do consider handshake packets to be fairly "warm".
Hi Jason
So for me, hot path is something called 10 million timers per
second. How often do handshake packets happen?
> I'm not especially keen on splitting that up into multiple warn_ons,
> mostly because if that is ever hint, something is seriously wrong,
> and the whole flow would likely then need auditing anyway.
On the flip side, if you think this is so unlikely, it probably means
it is hard to reproduce. And then you will wish you knew exactly which
triggered. If you can get the disassembly and stack trace you might be
able to figure it out, but have a print could be a lot easier.
Anyway, it was just a suggestion. No worries.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH v2] bpf: btf: Fix a missing-check bug
From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2018-10-25 22:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Lau, Wenwen Wang
Cc: Kangjie Lu, Alexei Starovoitov,
open list:BPF (Safe dynamic programs and tools),
open list:BPF (Safe dynamic programs and tools)
In-Reply-To: <20181024203548.glxgu3bqd47minmg@kafai-mbp>
On 10/24/2018 10:42 PM, Martin Lau wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 06:22:46PM +0000, Martin Lau wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 05:26:23PM +0000, Martin Lau wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 08:00:19AM -0500, Wenwen Wang wrote:
>>>> In btf_parse(), the header of the user-space btf data 'btf_data' is firstly
>>>> parsed and verified through btf_parse_hdr(). In btf_parse_hdr(), the header
>>>> is copied from user-space 'btf_data' to kernel-space 'btf->hdr' and then
>>>> verified. If no error happens during the verification process, the whole
>>>> data of 'btf_data', including the header, is then copied to 'data' in
>>>> btf_parse(). It is obvious that the header is copied twice here. More
>>>> importantly, no check is enforced after the second copy to make sure the
>>>> headers obtained in these two copies are same. Given that 'btf_data'
>>>> resides in the user space, a malicious user can race to modify the header
>>>> between these two copies. By doing so, the user can inject inconsistent
>>>> data, which can cause undefined behavior of the kernel and introduce
>>>> potential security risk.
>> btw, I am working on a patch that copies the btf_data before parsing/verifying
>> the header. That should avoid this from happening but that will
>> require a bit more code churns for the bpf branch.
>>
> It is what I have in mind:
>
> It is not a good idea to check the BTF header before copying the
> user btf_data. The verified header may not be the one actually
> copied to btf->data (e.g. userspace may modify the passed in
> btf_data in between). Like the one fixed in
> commit 8af03d1ae2e1 ("bpf: btf: Fix a missing check bug").
>
> This patch copies the user btf_data before parsing/verifying
> the BTF header.
>
> Fixes: 69b693f0aefa ("bpf: btf: Introduce BPF Type Format (BTF)")
> Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
I've added Co-developed-by tag and applied it to bpf tree, thanks everyone!
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] dp83867: fix speed 10 in sgmii mode
From: Andrew Lunn @ 2018-10-25 23:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Max Uvarov; +Cc: linux-kernel, f.fainelli, netdev
In-Reply-To: <20181025110530.22826-1-muvarov@gmail.com>
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 02:05:30PM +0300, Max Uvarov wrote:
Hi Max
> For support 10Mps sped in SGMII mode DP83867_10M_SGMII_RATE_ADAPT bit
speed.
> of DP83867_10M_SGMII_CFG register has to be cleared by software.
> That does not affect speeds 100 and 1000 so can be done on init.
It would be good to add a Fixes: tag. Has this always been broken?
Thanks
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] selftests/bpf: add config fragments BPF_STREAM_PARSER and XDP_SOCKETS
From: Naresh Kamboju @ 2018-10-25 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netdev; +Cc: bhole_prashant_q7, daniel, davem
BPF sockmap and hashmap are dependent on CONFIG_BPF_STREAM_PARSER and
xskmap is dependent on CONFIG_XDP_SOCKETS
Signed-off-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config
index dd49df5e2df4..7f90d3645af8 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config
@@ -20,3 +20,5 @@ CONFIG_VXLAN=y
CONFIG_GENEVE=y
CONFIG_NET_CLS_FLOWER=m
CONFIG_LWTUNNEL=y
+CONFIG_BPF_STREAM_PARSER=y
+CONFIG_XDP_SOCKETS=y
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related
* for your images 15
From: Kate @ 2018-10-24 11:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netdev
We are an imaging team who can process 300+ images daily.
If you need any image editing service, please contact us today.
We do mainly images cut out and clipping path, masking.
Such as for your ecommerce photos, jewelry photos retouching, also it is
for beauty portraits and skin images
and wedding photos.
We provide test editing if you send some photos.
Thanks,
Kate
^ permalink raw reply
* for your images 15
From: Kate @ 2018-10-24 11:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netdev
We are an imaging team who can process 300+ images daily.
If you need any image editing service, please contact us today.
We do mainly images cut out and clipping path, masking.
Such as for your ecommerce photos, jewelry photos retouching, also it is
for beauty portraits and skin images
and wedding photos.
We provide test editing if you send some photos.
Thanks,
Kate
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [RFC net-next v2 0/8] indirect tc block cb registration
From: John Hurley @ 2018-10-25 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jiri Pirko
Cc: Linux Netdev List, oss-drivers, Or Gerlitz, ozsh, Jakub Kicinski,
Simon Horman, avivh
In-Reply-To: <20181025125241.GD2143@nanopsycho>
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 1:58 PM Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
>
> Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 02:26:49PM CEST, john.hurley@netronome.com wrote:
> >This patchset introduces an alternative to egdev offload by allowing a
> >driver to register for block updates when an external device (e.g. tunnel
> >netdev) is bound to a TC block. Drivers can track new netdevs or register
> >to existing ones to receive information on such events. Based on this,
> >they may register for block offload rules using already existing
> >functions.
> >
> >The patchset also implements this new indirect block registration in the
> >NFP driver to allow the offloading of tunnel rules. The use of egdev
> >offload (which is currently only used for tunnel offload) is subsequently
> >removed.
>
> John, I'm missing v1->v2 changelog. Could you please add it?
>
> Thanks!
Hi Jiri,
There's little change outside the NFP in v2 but here's short changelog:
v1->v2:
- free allocated owner struct in block_owner_clean function
- add geneve type helper function
- move test stub in NFP (v1 patch 2) to full tunnel offload
implementation via indirect blocks (v2 patches 3-8)
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [RFC net-next v2 2/8] net: add netif_is_geneve()
From: John Hurley @ 2018-10-25 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jiri Pirko
Cc: Linux Netdev List, oss-drivers, Or Gerlitz, ozsh, Jakub Kicinski,
Simon Horman, avivh
In-Reply-To: <20181025125416.GE2143@nanopsycho>
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 2:00 PM Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
>
> Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 02:26:51PM CEST, john.hurley@netronome.com wrote:
> >Add a helper function to determine if the type of a netdev is geneve based
> >on its rtnl_link_ops. This allows drivers that may wish to ofload tunnels
> >to check the underlying type of the device.
> >
> >A recent patch added a similar helper to vxlan.h
> >
> >Signed-off-by: John Hurley <john.hurley@netronome.com>
> >Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
>
> I don't understand why this and the next patch are part of this
> patchset. They don't seem directly related.
This is used in later patches that implement the indirect block
offload but I suppose it is not directly related.
We can probably move it to a separate patchset.
Thanks
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] tools: sync linux/bpf.h
From: Lorenz Bauer @ 2018-10-25 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: liu.song.a23; +Cc: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, netdev, linux-api
In-Reply-To: <CAPhsuW5fbhQ1SBurL2q6hm=yV0a_Vw-_gjsz8LHJ76QwcqVXsQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 01:12, Song Liu <liu.song.a23@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 3:34 AM Lorenz Bauer <lmb@cloudflare.com> wrote:
> >
> > Synchronize changes to linux/bpf.h from
> > commit 88db241b34bf ("bpf: allow zero-initializing hash map seed").
> I guess we cannot keep this hash during git-am? We probably don't
> need this hash anyway, as the two patches will be applied back to back.
I copied what was done in one of the previous commits that synced the
header. I'm a bit at a
loss what to put in the commit message otherwise.
--
Lorenz Bauer | Systems Engineer
25 Lavington St., London SE1 0NZ
www.cloudflare.com
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] bpf: allow zero-initializing hash map seed
From: Lorenz Bauer @ 2018-10-25 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: liu.song.a23; +Cc: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, netdev, linux-api
In-Reply-To: <CAPhsuW5_1LRw=tjaNWfgrPKaS_Rs12BYAHPOjmXwEs8C9YSy1Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 01:08, Song Liu <liu.song.a23@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> > @@ -253,6 +253,8 @@ enum bpf_attach_type {
> > #define BPF_F_NO_COMMON_LRU (1U << 1)
> > /* Specify numa node during map creation */
> > #define BPF_F_NUMA_NODE (1U << 2)
> > +/* Zero-initialize hash function seed. This should only be used for testing. */
> > +#define BPF_F_ZERO_SEED (1U << 6)
>
> Please add this line after
> #define BPF_F_STACK_BUILD_ID (1U << 5)
I wanted to keep the flags for BPF_MAP_CREATE grouped together.
Maybe the correct value is (1U << 3)? It seemed like the other flags
were allocated to avoid
overlap between different BPF commands, however, so I tried to follow suit.
--
Lorenz Bauer | Systems Engineer
25 Lavington St., London SE1 0NZ
www.cloudflare.com
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH net-next v8 28/28] net: WireGuard secure network tunnel
From: Jason A. Donenfeld @ 2018-10-25 23:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Lunn
Cc: LKML, Netdev, Linux Crypto Mailing List, David Miller,
Greg Kroah-Hartman
In-Reply-To: <20181025224426.GC6276@lunn.ch>
Hi Andrew,
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 12:44 AM Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> wrote:
> Out of tree is important here. To some degree, mainline does not care
> about out of tree drivers. Putting in a bandaid for them does not help
> get them fixed.
>
> I would drop this bandaid. If the Android community decides to move
> wireguard from mainline into their fork, they can put the bandaid back
> in again, or get the driver fixed.
No out-of-tree is really not important here, and sorry if mentioning
that in my explanation was distracting and caused you to
misunderstand. The issue isn't the crazy wireless driver; the issue is
that suspend on Android happens all the time, and the entire Android
way of using Linux is centered around non-stop suspending, with
triggers to wake up (wifi drivers, for example, like the out-of-tree
qcacld one, but presumably in tree ones too), and ways of controlling
when it goes to sleep (screen blanking, wakelocks, etc). The Android
model of Linux revolves around this, and hence the suspend semantics
for WireGuard respect this model and adjust accordingly, using the
appropriate CONFIG_ANDROID to determine which model we're operating
under. This is not a bandaid, and it doesn't have to do with forks of
the Linux kernel.
Jason
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH net-next v8 28/28] net: WireGuard secure network tunnel
From: Jason A. Donenfeld @ 2018-10-25 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Lunn
Cc: LKML, Netdev, Linux Crypto Mailing List, David Miller,
Greg Kroah-Hartman
In-Reply-To: <20181025223746.GB6276@lunn.ch>
Hi Andrew,
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 12:37 AM Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> wrote:
> I can understand that. But on the flip side, CAKE reached something
> like version 19 before it got merged. Wireguard is looking similar.
> An addition like the above, is not controversial. You could submit
> such a single patch in a weeks time when net-next reopens, and
> probably version 1 or 2 will get accepted.
Alright, maybe I'll give it a try that way. Previously, every time I
wanted to send things upstream for WireGuard, I'd be sure to find
other users in the tree of what I was adding, since WireGuard wasn't
ready for patchsets yet. But I guess now that some series have begun,
it's more acceptable to add APIs here and there as you described.
Jason
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH net-next v8 28/28] net: WireGuard secure network tunnel
From: Jason A. Donenfeld @ 2018-10-26 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Lunn
Cc: LKML, Netdev, Linux Crypto Mailing List, David Miller,
Greg Kroah-Hartman
In-Reply-To: <20181025225344.GD6276@lunn.ch>
Hi Andrew,
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 12:53 AM Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> wrote:
> > This is on the hot path, actually. Well, it's not on path of data
> > packets, but I do consider handshake packets to be fairly "warm".
>
> So for me, hot path is something called 10 million timers per
> second. How often do handshake packets happen?
I can actually imagine situations in which this rate might happen.
Handshake performance is important.
Jason
^ permalink raw reply
* netif_receive_skb is taking long time
From: Keyur Amrutbhai Patel @ 2018-10-25 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Hi,
In my NIC driver "netif_receive_skb" is taking too long time. Almost 3375 neno seconds. Which is more than whole packet processing from interrupt.
Could anyone please help me to understand what could be the reason behind this? How to solve it to take minimum time?
Is there any standard calls which we need to follow in order to get faster performance?
Regards,
Keyur
This email and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the named recipient(s) and contain(s) confidential information that may be proprietary, privileged or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, copy, or forward this email message or any attachments. Delete this email message and any attachments immediately.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: add bpf_jit_limit knob to restrict unpriv allocations
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2018-10-26 0:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Borkmann
Cc: ast, rick.p.edgecombe, eric.dumazet, jannh, keescook,
linux-kernel, netdev
In-Reply-To: <20181022231104.3443-1-daniel@iogearbox.net>
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 01:11:04AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> Rick reported that the BPF JIT could potentially fill the entire module
> space with BPF programs from unprivileged users which would prevent later
> attempts to load normal kernel modules or privileged BPF programs, for
> example. If JIT was enabled but unsuccessful to generate the image, then
> before commit 290af86629b2 ("bpf: introduce BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON config")
> we would always fall back to the BPF interpreter. Nowadays in the case
> where the CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON could be set, then the load will abort
> with a failure since the BPF interpreter was compiled out.
>
> Add a global limit and enforce it for unprivileged users such that in case
> of BPF interpreter compiled out we fail once the limit has been reached
> or we fall back to BPF interpreter earlier w/o using module mem if latter
> was compiled in. In a next step, fair share among unprivileged users can
> be resolved in particular for the case where we would fail hard once limit
> is reached.
>
> Fixes: 290af86629b2 ("bpf: introduce BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON config")
> Fixes: 0a14842f5a3c ("net: filter: Just In Time compiler for x86-64")
> Co-Developed-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
> Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> ---
> Hi Rick, I've reworked the original patch into something much simpler
> which is only focussing on the actual main issue we want to resolve right
> now as a first step to make some forward progress, that is, limiting usage
> on the JIT for unprivileged users. Tested the below on x86 and arm64.
> (Trimmed down massive Cc list as well a bit and Cc'ed people related to
> commits referenced and netdev where BPF patches are usually discussed.)
> Thanks a lot!
Applied to bpf tree. Thanks Daniel.
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH net] r8169: fix broken Wake-on-LAN from S5 (poweroff)
From: Heiner Kallweit @ 2018-10-25 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Miller, Realtek linux nic maintainers
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Neil MacLeod
It was reported that WoL from S5 is broken (WoL from S3 works) and the
analysis showed that during system shutdown the network interface was
brought down already when the actual kernel shutdown started.
Therefore netif_running() returned false and as a consequence the PHY
was suspended. Obviously WoL wasn't working then.
To fix this the original patch needs to be effectively reverted.
A side effect is that when normally bringing down the interface and
WoL is enabled the PHY will remain powered on (like it was before the
original patch).
Fixes: fe87bef01f9b ("r8169: don't check WoL when powering down PHY and interface is down")
Reported-by: Neil MacLeod <neil@nmacleod.com>
Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c | 9 +++++++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c
index 0d8070adc..987fedeee 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c
@@ -4162,10 +4162,15 @@ static void rtl_wol_suspend_quirk(struct rtl8169_private *tp)
static bool rtl_wol_pll_power_down(struct rtl8169_private *tp)
{
- if (!netif_running(tp->dev) || !__rtl8169_get_wol(tp))
+ struct phy_device *phydev;
+
+ if (!__rtl8169_get_wol(tp))
return false;
- phy_speed_down(tp->dev->phydev, false);
+ /* phydev may not be attached to netdevice */
+ phydev = mdiobus_get_phy(tp->mii_bus, 0);
+
+ phy_speed_down(phydev, false);
rtl_wol_suspend_quirk(tp);
return true;
--
2.19.1
^ permalink raw reply related
* RE: netif_receive_skb is taking long time
From: Keyur Amrutbhai Patel @ 2018-10-25 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <BN6PR02MB2641D863865B2498ACD2043DB7F70@BN6PR02MB2641.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Any help on this would be appreciated.
-----Original Message-----
From: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org> On Behalf Of Keyur Amrutbhai Patel
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 9:09 PM
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: netif_receive_skb is taking long time
Hi,
In my NIC driver "netif_receive_skb" is taking too long time. Almost 3375 neno seconds. Which is more than whole packet processing from interrupt.
Could anyone please help me to understand what could be the reason behind this? How to solve it to take minimum time?
Is there any standard calls which we need to follow in order to get faster performance?
Regards,
Keyur
This email and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the named recipient(s) and contain(s) confidential information that may be proprietary, privileged or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, copy, or forward this email message or any attachments. Delete this email message and any attachments immediately.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: netif_receive_skb is taking long time
From: Eric Dumazet @ 2018-10-25 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Keyur Amrutbhai Patel, netdev@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <BN6PR02MB2641D863865B2498ACD2043DB7F70@BN6PR02MB2641.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
On 10/25/2018 08:39 AM, Keyur Amrutbhai Patel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In my NIC driver "netif_receive_skb" is taking too long time. Almost 3375 neno seconds. Which is more than whole packet processing from interrupt.
>
> Could anyone please help me to understand what could be the reason behind this? How to solve it to take minimum time?
>
> Is there any standard calls which we need to follow in order to get faster performance?
>
First step would be to read Documentation/networking/scaling.txt and see if anything there helps.
Have you tried to profile the kernel and see if some contention or hot function appears ?
Maybe use a faster cpu, or remove not needed features like too heavy netfilter rules.
We can not really answer your question, you do not provide enough information.
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH v1 net] lan743x: Remove SPI dependency from Microchip group
From: Bryan Whitehead @ 2018-10-25 17:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: davem; +Cc: netdev, UNGLinuxDriver
The SPI dependency does not apply to lan743x driver, and other
drivers in the group already state their dependence on SPI.
Bryan Whitehead (1):
lan743x: Remove SPI dependency from Microchip group.
drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/Kconfig | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH v1 net] lan743x: Remove SPI dependency from Microchip group.
From: Bryan Whitehead @ 2018-10-25 17:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: davem; +Cc: netdev, UNGLinuxDriver
In-Reply-To: <1540487378-18986-1-git-send-email-Bryan.Whitehead@microchip.com>
The SPI dependency does not apply to lan743x driver, and other
drivers in the group already state their dependence on SPI.
Signed-off-by: Bryan Whitehead <Bryan.Whitehead@microchip.com>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/Kconfig | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/Kconfig b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/Kconfig
index 16bd3f4..cf1d491 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/Kconfig
@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@
config NET_VENDOR_MICROCHIP
bool "Microchip devices"
default y
- depends on SPI
---help---
If you have a network (Ethernet) card belonging to this class, say Y.
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related
* RE: netif_receive_skb is taking long time
From: Keyur Amrutbhai Patel @ 2018-10-25 17:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eric Dumazet; +Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <5d039fa2-95fc-dbdf-4ab0-d5cccebe8bcc@gmail.com>
Hi Eric,
First of all thank you for replying and giving some spotlight.
First step would be to read Documentation/networking/scaling.txt and see if anything there helps.
- This is good article. I had gone through it. Any suggestion on RSS? How to configure it? Do I need to take care anything specially in my NIC driver?
Have you tried to profile the kernel and see if some contention or hot function appears ?
- I have added time stampings in different functions. That is how I came to know that almost ~3375 neno seconds are used by just " netif_receive_skb " don’t know why. With less than that time my DMA operation is finishes and descriptors are managed.
Current time consuming function are " netif_receive_skb " and " napi_alloc_skb " these two function calls are taking maximum about of time
Maybe use a faster cpu, or remove not needed features like too heavy netfilter rules.
- I am using Intex Xeon Platinum series processors. These are fast enough CPUs available in market with 64 cores. 2 CPU nodes (each has 32 core)
We can not really answer your question, you do not provide enough information.
- Please let me know what additional details you need. We have 6 queues in HW. Each is mapped to MSI-X vector. Each vector is giving interrupt on different CPU. From interrupt I am scheduling napi and from napi poll function I am getting DMA page and constructing skb and passing it to network layer with "netif_receive_skb".
Let me know additional details which are required.
Regards,
Keyur
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 10:38 PM
To: Keyur Amrutbhai Patel <keyurp@xilinx.com>; netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: netif_receive_skb is taking long time
EXTERNAL EMAIL
On 10/25/2018 08:39 AM, Keyur Amrutbhai Patel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In my NIC driver "netif_receive_skb" is taking too long time. Almost 3375 neno seconds. Which is more than whole packet processing from interrupt.
>
> Could anyone please help me to understand what could be the reason behind this? How to solve it to take minimum time?
>
> Is there any standard calls which we need to follow in order to get faster performance?
>
First step would be to read Documentation/networking/scaling.txt and see if anything there helps.
Have you tried to profile the kernel and see if some contention or hot function appears ?
Maybe use a faster cpu, or remove not needed features like too heavy netfilter rules.
We can not really answer your question, you do not provide enough information.
^ permalink raw reply
page: next (older) | prev (newer) | latest
- recent:[subjects (threaded)|topics (new)|topics (active)]
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox