netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/3] inetpeer: Support ipv6 addresses.

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: <20101129.212222.115953137.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2010 21:22:22 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	xiaosuo@...il.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] inetpeer: Support ipv6 addresses.

From: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 12:51:08 +0800

> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:14 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>> From: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
>> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 10:33:49 +0800
>>
>>> I have thought about converting this AVL tree to rbtree. When I saw
>>> the comment above, I gave it up, because rbtree makes this structure
>>> bigger. If ipv6 support is added, I think it is time to turn to
>>> rbtree. :)
>>
>> If it takes size over 128 bytes, it is probably still a bad idea.
>> Right now it is just under 128.
>>
> 
> Why 128? The current size of inet_peer is 64 bytes, and after your
> ipv6 patch, it is just 80. And, inet_peer is allocated from its own
> mem_cache, so the size of the memory for it should not be aligned to
> 2^n.

Sorry, I was taking into the consideration other work I am doing
which will move all of the routing metrics into inet_peer as well.

With ipv6 address support, it fits perfectly into 128 bytes on
64-bit.
--
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