[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3448099.9yk84El3Sa@stwm.de>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 17:46:02 +0200
From: Wolfgang Walter <linux@...m.de>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
David Miller <davem@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Regression: kernel 4.14 an later very slow with many ipsec tunnels
Am Donnerstag, 13. September 2018, 15:58:44 schrieb Florian Westphal:
> Wolfgang Walter <linux@...m.de> wrote:
> > thanks to the fix from Steffen Klassert I could now run 4.14.69 + his
> > patch
> > and 4.18.7 + his patch without oopsing immediately.
> >
> > But I found that those kernels perform very bad. They perform so bad that
> > they are unusable for our router with about 3000 ipsec tunnels (tunnel
> > mode network <-> network).
>
> Can you do a 'perf record -a -g sleep 5' with 4.18 and provide 'perf
> report' result?
>
> It would be good to see where those cycles are spent.
I'll try that but this isn't that easy as the router image does not contain
perf. I also have to do that on our production router. I try to do that
tomorrow evening.
What I can say is that it depends mainly on number of policy rules and SA.
Regards
--
Wolfgang Walter
Studentenwerk München
Anstalt des öffentlichen Rechts
Powered by blists - more mailing lists