netdev - Re: small RPS cache for fragments?

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:	Mon, 06 Jun 2011 11:06:19 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: small RPS cache for fragments?

On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 19:15 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le lundi 06 juin 2011 à 10:08 -0700, Rick Jones a écrit :
> 
> > Mode-rr bonding reorders TCP segments all the time. 
> 
> Shouldnt TCP frames have DF bit set ?

I was ass-u-me-ing that when talking about TCP, David was speaking
generally about TCP segments, and suggesting that were bonding's mode-rr
altered to not re-order TCP segments, a similar technique
could/would/should avoid re-ordering IP datagram fragments, regardless
of their payload.

Jay will have to weigh-in on how difficult that would be, I'm guessing
it would mean a fair bit of overhead to mode-rr though, to know the
completion status of frames from the same flow and/or the depth of the
tx queues etc etc.  I thought that one of mode-rr's (few IMO, just check
the archives where I've complained about it :) redeeming qualities was
its minimal overhead.

rick jones

--
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