netdev - Re: [RFC] Could we avoid touching dst->refcount in some cases ?

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: <20081124.153611.199553928.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:36:11 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	andi@...stfloor.org
Cc:	dada1@...mosbay.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Could we avoid touching dst->refcount in some cases ?

From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:27:09 +0100

> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:14:29AM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Andi Kleen a écrit :
> > >Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com> writes:
> > >
> > >>tbench has hard time incrementing decrementing the route cache refcount
> > >>shared by all communications on localhost.
> > >
> > >iirc there was a patch some time ago to use per CPU loopback devices to 
> > >avoid this, but it was considered too much a benchmark hack.
> > >As core counts increase it might stop being that though.
> > 
> > Well, you probably mention Stephen patch to avoid dirtying other contended
> > cache lines (one napi structure per cpu)
> 
> No that patch wasn't from Stephen. iirc it was from someone at SGI.

That's how I remember it too.
--
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