netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] inet: add second hash table

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: <4FC64A74.8000308@candelatech.com>
Date:	Wed, 30 May 2012 09:27:32 -0700
From:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	Daniel Baluta <dbaluta@...acom.com>,
	Alexandru Copot <alex.mihai.c@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
	gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org,
	yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Lucian Grijincu <lucian.grijincu@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] inet: add second hash table

On 05/30/2012 05:41 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 15:32 +0300, Daniel Baluta wrote:

> UDP case was a bit different, since production machine could really have
> thousand of UDP flows for tunnel terminations.
>
> But for TCP, unless your very specific needs I don't see the real need
> to review 400 lines of patches ?
>
> Nobody but you ever complained of listen() being performance critical
> with 16.000 IP on a machime...

Well, we do similar things and would probably benefit from this change...

If it would help, I'll add these to our kernels and run them through
some of our test cases..but will probably be a week or two at soonest...

Thanks,
Ben


-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.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