netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/2]: Remote softirq invocation infrastructure.

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

Date:	Sat, 20 Sep 2008 23:57:27 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:	dwalker@...sta.com, arjan@...radead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	jens.axboe@...cle.com, steffen.klassert@...unet.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2]: Remote softirq invocation infrastructure.

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 15:05:45 +0900

> Unfortunately doing this with IPsec is going to be non-trivial
> since we still want to maintain packet ordering inside IPsec
> and you don't get the inner flow information until you decrypt
> the packet.

Steffen has mechanisms by which to deal with this in his patches.

> So if we want to process IPsec packets in parallel it's best to
> implement that from within the crypto API where we can queue the
> result in order to ensure proper ordering.

That's another option, of course.  And crypto could use remote
softirqs even for that :-)

> Of course, we need to balance any effort spent on this with the
> likelihood that hardware improvements will soon make this obsolete
> (for IPsec anyway).

True, but old hardware will always exist.

A lot of very reasonable machines out there will benefit from software
RX flow seperation.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html