netdev - Re: [PATCH] iptables: lock free counters

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]

Date:	Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:02:43 -0800
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iptables: lock free counters

On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 22:56:39 +0100
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net> wrote:

> Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Patrick McHardy a écrit :
> >> Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >>> real    0m1.810s
> >>> user    0m0.000s
> >>> sys     0m0.001s
> >> Thats really slow ...
> >>
> >>> CONFIG_NO_HZ=y
> >>> CONFIG_HZ_1000=y
> >>> CONFIG_HZ=1000
> >>>
> >>> One cpu is 100% handling softirqs, could it be the problem ?
> >> Is this fixed by your RCU quiescent state fix?
> > 
> > Yes it is :)
> 
> Great, thanks :)

I wonder if the RCU quiescent fix should go in 2.6.29 because it
fixes other issues like route changing RCU latency under Dos attack.
--
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