[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1340080271.7491.2187.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 06:31:11 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv4: Early TCP socket demux.
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 21:15 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> > This reminds the idea of having seperate dst per tcp socket, to remove
> > the dst refcnt contention as well.
>
> I'm leery of this.
>
> We're going to move towards having dst entries more strongly shared
> as we move to remove the routing cache.
>
> In fact I have another short-term change planned that adjusts which
> keys the routing cache uses based upon what kinds of keys are actually
> active in the current FIB rule configuration.
>
> I think we want to encourage sharing and make the route footprint
> smaller rather than expanding it's size artificually on even the
> socket level.
>
> If you really care about this refcount problem, then it's another
> reason to never orphan socket sourced packets. Then we wouldn't need
> to ever refcount the route just to send a packet, we'd just use the
> implicit reference held by the socket instead. Socket route releasing
> would be held back by the presence of any packets in the socket send
> queue. If we have to reset the dst mis-lifetime due to route flushes,
> we'd need to use a specific packet as a sequence point.
>
> That to me sounds like a more reasonable approach than just making
> more and more routes.
We already don't touch dst refcnt on TCP xmit path, unless packet is
parked in Qdisc queue...
But with BQL this is becoming less effective.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists