linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/10] af_unix: add multicast and filtering features to AF

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:	Thu, 01 Mar 2012 20:29:04 +0100
From:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>
To:	Javier Martinez Canillas <martinez.javier@...il.com>
CC:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>,
	Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo.moya@...labora.co.uk>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, javier@...labora.co.uk,
	lennart@...ttering.net, kay.sievers@...y.org,
	alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk, bart.cerneels@...labora.co.uk,
	sjoerd.simons@...labora.co.uk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/10] af_unix: add multicast and filtering features to
 AF_UNIX

On 03/01/2012 08:02 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>> Le 1 mars 2012 08:02, Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com> a écrit :
>>>
>>> Contrary to someones believes I don't think AF_INET is that fast (e.g.
>>> http://scottmoonen.com/2008/04/05/a-performance-comparison-of-af_unix-with-loopback-on-linux/)
>>>
>>
>> Oh you mention a recent zork it seems ;)
>>
>> Are we speaking of performance problems, apart from scheduler problems
>> for D-Bus (each message wakeing all receivers, all receivers read and
>> drop message but the target) ?
>>
> 
> Hi Eric,
> 
> The only performance problem we are talking about is the scheduling
> for D-bus (context switch to the daemon for each message). With today
> implementation the receivers only gets messages that were sent to it
> but the D-bus daemon has to be wake it up for every message to he can
> do the routing. For multicast messages (i.e: D-bus signals) this is
> even worse since the daemon has to do a send() for each receiver.
> 
>> I am actually one of the few people working to improve performance on
>> both AF_INET and AF_UNIX parts. Just take a look at recent commits.
>>
>> Right now you can send/receive millions of udp messages per second on
>> your linux machine, if you figured out how to avoid process scheduler
>> costs. If D-Bus wants more, I highly suggest using shared memory
>> instead of passing messages.
>> --
> 
> Yes, I also thought that AF_UNIX would be more efficient than AF_INET
> but I was wrong. Yesterday I wrote some tests using our multicast unix
> socket, UDP multicast over IP on a single machine and even multicast
> using AF_NETLINK sockets and got very similar performance results.
> 
> The only problem is the ordering and control flow requirements for D-bus.
> 

And the fd passing for out-ouf-band communication used for some D-bus
application such as oFono and BlueZ.

Regards,
Javier
--
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/