netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] Receive Packet Steering

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: <20090717.110840.128146209.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Fri, 17 Jul 2009 11:08:40 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	therbert@...gle.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Receive Packet Steering

From: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 11:05:58 -0700

> The advantage is that Toeplitz, or any reasonable device provided
> hash, allows packet steering to be done without taking any cache
> misses on the packet itself.  In particular, this helps with a NIC
> that just provides Toeplitz hash (without multiQ),

Good point.

Depending upon the cache line size, however, we might have
at least the IP header in the cpu cache at this point since
eth_type_trans() had to pull in the entire ethernet header
underneath.

I totally misunderstood you, I thought you meant that with a
pure SW hash implementation, Toeplitz did better than jhash.
--
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