linux-kernel - Re: High contention on the sk_buff

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]

Message-ID: <20090318215901.GV11935@one.firstfloor.org>
Date:	Wed, 18 Mar 2009 22:59:01 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Vernon Mauery <vernux@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Eilon Greenstein <eilong@...adcom.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock

> Thanks.  I will test to see how this affects this lock contention the
> next time the broadcom hardware is available.

The other strategy to reduce lock contention here is to use TSO/GSO/USO.
With that the lock has to be taken less often because there are less packets
travelling down the stack. I'm not sure how well that works with netperf style 
workloads though. Using multiple TX queues is probably better though if you have
capable hardware. Or ideally both.

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/