netdev - Re: flow director and packet ordering

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:	Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:59:56 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:	peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com
Subject: Re: flow director and packet ordering

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 09:10:51 +0800

> In that case I don't see the big need in moving the flows/sockets
> after establishment.  After all process migration should be rare,
> so if it does occur then it's OK for the existing sockets to stay
> on their original queue.

I personally assume that a master process that accepts connections
and then hands them off down to worker threads is quite common.

> I'm curious about what the limit on the number of flows is though.
> Because when you go above that limit performance will magically
> suck :)

Yes, of course that's an important aspect of the implementation.
--
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