netdev - Re: irq disable in __netdev_alloc

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:	Wed, 22 Oct 2014 23:12:21 -0700
From:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: irq disable in __netdev_alloc_frag() ?

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:14 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Really, I doubt this will make any difference in real workloads
> where bottleneck is memory bandwidth, not the time taken by
> pushf/cli/popf.
>
> What difference do you have on a real workload like : netperf TCP_RR or
> UDP_RR ?

there are different workloads. l2/l3 switching is very real
as well. For tcp_rr on the host the difference will be
minimal, since the time is spent elsewhere. For cases
that don't use tcp stack, but do pure l2/l3 processing
all improvements will add up. imo the kernel should be
optimized for all use cases when possible.
--
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