netdev - Re: [PATCH 00/10 net-next] Introduce per interface ipv4 statistics

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: <1324055686.25554.66.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC>
Date:	Fri, 16 Dec 2011 18:14:46 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	igorm@....rs, netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10 net-next] Introduce per interface ipv4 statistics

Le vendredi 16 décembre 2011 à 10:55 -0600, Christoph Lameter a écrit :
> On Fri, 16 Dec 2011, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> > Or we could use a hierarchical split : Say 16 (or 32 or 64) cpus share
> > same counters (must be atomic if NR_CPUS > 16/32/64)
> 
> Then you'd need to have locking or full atomic operations for the
> counters.

I mentioned that : "(must be atomic if NR_CPUS > 16/32/64)"


>  Reduction of network processing to a set of processors also will
> have other beneficial effects in addition to cache hotness. It would
> removing OS jitter etc etc.
> 

You already can do that right now, with or without hardware help.

See numerous improvements in this area (RPS/RFS/RSS/XPS ... in
Documentation/networking/scaling.txt)


> > percpu_alloc() -> percpugroup_alloc()
> 
> Sounds like a per cpuset/cgroup allocation?
> 



--
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