netdev - Re: inetpeer with create==0

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]

Date:	Thu, 3 Mar 2011 13:30:03 +0800
From:	Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: inetpeer with create==0

On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 12:45 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
>
> I looked at the generic radix tree implementation, and it supports
> full RCU lookups in parallel with insert/delete.  It handles the race
> case without the relookup under lock because it creates fixed paths
> to "slots" where nodes live using shifts and masks.  So if a path
> to a slot ever existed, it will always exist.
>
> Take a look at lib/radix-tree.c and include/linux/radix-tree.h if
> you are curious.
>
> I think we should do something similar for inetpeer.  Currently we
> cannot just use the existing generic radix-tree code because it only
> supports indexes as large as "unsigned long" and we need to handle
> 128-bit ipv6 addresses.

I am just wondering why we need a trie(radix tree) here, we don't have
to do LPM since the lengths of the keys are always fixed(ether 4 or
16). Maybe a hash table is enough and simpler, and it is RCU
compatible.


-- 
Regards,
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@...il.com)
--
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