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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 25 Nov 2008 07:52:59 +0000
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To:	hadi@...erus.ca
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Badalian Vyacheslav <slavon@...telecom.ru>,
	Denys Fedoryshchenko <denys@...p.net.lb>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: gen_estimator: Fix gen_kill_estimator() lookups

On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:00:58AM -0500, jamal wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 13:37 +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> 
> > I first thought about a hash, but alas Patrick's solution is sched
> > only... Anyway, I din't see too much overhead in memory use, and no
> > diffrence in addition times (without batching).
> 
> Showing numbers in a commit for perf improvement IMO is always a good
> thing.

Sure, but alas I'm not a perf guy...

> BTW, I dont think it would make a noticeable difference (batching
> notwithstanding) in addition or even deletion unless you have quiet a
> few with the same estimate sampling time loaded.

My very unprofessional tests gave approximately 319s vs. 0.34s with:
"time tc qdisc del dev lo root" for 65535 htb classes, and as you
predicted (and I was surprised) no noticeable difference in addition
times with or without batching.
 
Cheers,
Jarek P.
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ