netdev - Re: SO_REUSEPORT - can it be done in kernel?

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: <1298661686.2659.106.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Fri, 25 Feb 2011 20:21:26 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	rick.jones2@...com
Cc:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...radead.org>,
	Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>,
	Bill Sommerfeld <wsommerfeld@...gle.com>,
	Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SO_REUSEPORT - can it be done in kernel?

Le vendredi 25 février 2011 à 11:18 -0800, Rick Jones a écrit :

> I think the idea is goodness, but will ask, was the (first) bottleneck
> actually in the kernel, or was it in bind itself?  I've seen
> single-instance, single-byte burst-mode netperf TCP_RR do in excess of
> 300K transactions per second (with TCP_NODELAY set) on an X5560 core.
> 
> ftp://ftp.netperf.org/netperf/misc/dl380g6_X5560_rhel54_ad386_cxgb3_1.4.1.2_b2b_to_same_agg_1500mtu_20100513-2.csv
> 
> and that was with now ancient RHEL5.4 bits...  yes, there is a bit of
> apples, oranges and kumquats but still, I am wondering if this didn't
> also "work around" some internal BIND scaling issues as well.
> 

A single core can probably give 300K transactions.

But if you use several cores, accessing a single socket (the one bound
on port 53), then performance drops because of false sharing,
locking....



--
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