netdev - Re: cat /proc/net/tcp takes 0.5 seconds on x86

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: <20080828074536.GK26610@one.firstfloor.org>
Date:	Thu, 28 Aug 2008 09:45:36 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, andi@...stfloor.org,
	davej@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, j.w.r.degoede@....nl
Subject: Re: cat /proc/net/tcp takes 0.5 seconds on x86_64

> When scanning route cache hash table, we can avoid taking locks for empty 
> buckets.

I'm not sure it's worth it in this case.  A rcu_read_lock() is a nop
(on non preemptible kernel) to very cheap (non atomic increment/decrement in 
cached task_struct) 

If you really wanted to make it faster I think a better strategy
would be to not take it every bucket, but maybe only every 100th
or so. That would still keep preempt off times reasonably low, but
even help when the table is filled. But not sure it would 
be even measurable, really it should be quite cheap.

-Andi

--
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