netdev - Re: [PATCH] ipv4: Remove unnecessary code from rt_check

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20120626.015612.985388265386248330.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jun 2012 01:56:12 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv4: Remove unnecessary code from rt_check_expire().

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:46:48 +0200

> On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 01:37 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> 
>> And think, we don't do any stupidity like this for the inetpeer cache
>> and no small cute animals have died as a result.
> 
> Thats because inetpeer is kept small.
> 
> We do have a smart gc on inetpeer cache (inet_peer_gc()),
> and inetpeer threshold is 65536 

Fair enough.

Keep in mind that rt_check_expire() was written before we had realtime
GC.  It used to be main component which kept hash chains of reasonable
size before real ->gc() triggers.

I have about 15 entries in my routing cache, there is no reason they
should be purged.

And consider TCP before early demux, so a connection doing financial
trades is idle for 5 minutes.  Do you really think the next trade
should have this pointless added latency just because we can't be
bothered to make rt_check_expired() smarter?
--
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