netdev - Re: [RFC] net/core/dst.c : Should'nt dst_run_gc() be more scalable and friendly ?

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: <20070817101030.cc64467a.dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:10:30 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] net/core/dst.c : Should'nt dst_run_gc() be more scalable
 and friendly ?

On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 07:33:39 +0800
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 05:40:44PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > 
> > So do you think this patch is enough or should we convert dst_run_gc processing from softirq to workqueue too ?
> 
> I think a workqueue would be the best solution since with
> that you wouldn't have to worry about processing things in
> chunks.

Will a workqueue react the same in case of a DDOS situation, 
where softirq could use all CPU cycles to handle incoming
packets and feed the GC list, and GC would never
have a chance to scan and free some items ?

About chunk processing, I did it on purpose, to not throw away
all CPU cache. Goal is to process entries, but not all of them
in a row, especially if we find many yet referenced entries
(and thus not candidates to freeing)

Thanks

-
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