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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zqoe9/TiETNQmb7z@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 04:24:39 -0700
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, leit@...a.com,
	Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
	"open list:NETWORKING DRIVERS" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: skbuff: Skip early return in skb_unref
 when debugging

Hello Paolo,

On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 11:38:38AM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> Could you please benchmark such scenario before and after this patch?

I've tested it on a 18-core Xeon D-2191A host, and I haven't found any
different in either TX/RX in TCP or UDP. At the same time, I must admit
that I have very low confidence in my tests.

I run the following tests for 10x on the same machine, just changing my
patch, and I getting the simple average of these 10 iterations. This is
what I am doing for TCP and UDP:

TCP:
	# iperf -s &
	# iperf -u -c localhost

	Output: 16.5 Gbits/sec

UDP:
	# iperf -s -u &
	# iperf -u -c localhost

	Output: 1.05 Mbits/sec

I don't know how to explain why UDP numbers are so low. I am happy to
run different tests, if you have any other recommendation.

--breno

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ