netdev - [RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 21 Feb 2008 19:51:52 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
To:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx()

Hi David

This is an RFC, based on net-2.6 for convenience only.

Thank you

[RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx()

Loopback transmit function loopback_xmit() actually calls netif_rx() to 
queue
a skb to the softnet queue, and arms a softirq so that this skb can be 
handled later.

This has a cost on SMP, because we need to hold a reference on the 
device, and free this
reference when softirq dequeues packet.

Following patch directly calls netif_receive_skb() and avoids lot of 
atomic operations.
(atomic_inc(&dev->refcnt), set_and_set_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state), ...
  atomic_dec(&dev->refcnt)...), cache line ping-pongs on device refcnt, 
but also softirq overhead.

This gives a nice boost on tbench for example (5 % on my machine)

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>

View attachment "loopback_xmit.patch" of type "text/plain" (356 bytes)