On Thursday 24 January 2013 13:47:40 Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Oliver Neukum <oneu...@suse.de> writes:
> > On Thursday 24 January 2013 12:22:54 Bjørn Mork wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry for being daft, but how do I code the "20 among the last 30" part
> >> there?
> >
> > Just by agreeing that you can live with false negatives but not false
> > positives
> >
> > if (++counter > 30) {
> > counter = bogus = 0;
> > } else {
> > if (is_bogus(packet)
> > bogus++;
> > if (bogus > counter/2)
Should probably be something like bogus > counter/2 + 10
> > throttle();
> > }
>
> So, add two new counters to struct usbnet for this? That seems a little
> overkill to me, but I don't see how else to implement anything like that.
Memory is cheap.
> It is still not completely clear to me how the throttling/unthrottling
> should be done. It tested with static counters (to avoid having to
> rebuild everything for this test) and a new EVENT_RX_THROTTLE flag.
> Still on top of my previous patch just for safety while testing, as I am
> fed up of having to reboot all the time :-)
>
> Doing the flag test in rx_submit seems simpler than trying to track all
> the places this is called. Still checking the dev->done.qlen to be able
> to unthrottle.
Ideally we would do some error handling. Does the device keep spewing
zero packets for all eternity?
Regards
Oliver
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
