netdev - Re: Regarding Routing table in Linux 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: <1320601372.6506.11.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Sun, 06 Nov 2011 18:42:52 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Ajith Adapa <adapa.ajith@...il.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Regarding Routing table in Linux kernel

Le dimanche 06 novembre 2011 à 12:43 +0530, Ajith Adapa a écrit :
> Hi,
> 
> I have few doubts regarding the routing table in linux kernel.
> 
> 1. Why does the linux kernel use hashing table for storing routing
> entries when there is patricia trie or radix tree which is more faster
> than Hash table ?
> 

I think you are mistaken. Routes are stored in a trie in recent kernels.

And route cache is scheduled to be removed at some point.

In normal situation, one hash lookup is the faster way to find a random
item, its a single memory cache line cost.


> 2. Is there any way we can test the performance of an routing
> algorithm before deploying in a real time scenario to check its
> performance ? I would like to test one of my implementations to check
> if there are any performance gains or not ?

Sorry there is no general answer. It all depends on your needs.


--
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