| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 19:37:58 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" <davids@...master.com> To: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: UDP packets scheduling > can anyone suggest me a proper way how to schedule UDP packets to > transmit at > some given rate? > > E.g., I have two boxes both having 10 GE interfaces. One box is able to > transmit at 9.9Gbps, the other one is able to receive only at > about 5.5Gbps. > Flow control must be turned off for some other reason. UDP is not a very good choice of protocol for this purpose. UDP pushes the transmit timing job into user-space, where it cannot be done particularly well. > How can I put delay between subsequent msg sends to achieve desired > packet rate without loses, e.g., 3.5Gbps without bursts? Even nanosleep() > with the lowest possible delay seems to be too much delay. Busy loop with > clock_gettime(3) works OK on SMP boxes, but on UP it causes problems. Why do you want to avoid bursts? You're going to be bursting between 10Gb/s and 0 anyway. It sounds like you're deliberately putting impossible requirements on yourself choosing the worst possible protocol and demanding the pacing be perfect. I don't think the technology to do that is here yet, but why would you possibly need it? 10GE cards tend to have large buffers precisely because it's not possible to get the timing even. Why is burstiness a problem? DS - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists