netdev - Re: [RFC 1/2] netmap: infrastructure (in staging)

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: <33F61BD9-8C2F-44E9-98BF-CD2D4C241A94@6wind.com>
Date:	Sun, 21 Apr 2013 01:20:02 +0200
From:	Vincent JARDIN <vincent.jardin@...nd.com>
To:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
	"stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	Eric Leblond <eric@...it.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] netmap: infrastructure (in staging)

+1 

Even if DPDK (see http://dpdk.org) offers some alternatives with better performances ; Netmap is a usable option and a good compromise.

I think both shall coexist.

Best regards,
  Vincent

Le 20 avr. 2013 à 13:31, Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com> a écrit :

> On 04/19/2013 09:58 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>> Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 12:45:37 -0700
>> 
>>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:06:51PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>>> Netmap is a framework for packet generation and capture from user
>>>> space. It allows for efficient packet handling (up to line rate on
>>>> 10Gb) with minimum system load.  For more info see:
>>>>    http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/netmap/
>> 
>> So are you saying that people can't get line rate today?
>> 
>> Even the the suricata folks are doing deep packet inspection at line
>> rate using AF_PACKET fanouts just fine.  That means they aren't just
>> grabbing packets, they are actually processing them and making
>> stateful decisions based upon the packet's contents.
>> 
>> That means that capture is cheap enough already that they have all
>> the compute left over that they need.
>> 
>> The existing mechanisms also have the huge advantage that they are
>> already implemented, require zero driver specific changes, and are
>> already starting to be deployed to end users.
> 
> +1, and if so, then I'm actually rather for further improving/optimizing/..
> AF_PACKET. Btw., Eric had a blog post from 2012 about this topic (and
> maybe TPACKET_V3 could even further improve perf. over TPACKET_V2 on this):
> 
>  https://home.regit.org/2012/07/suricata-to-10gbps-and-beyond/
> 
> Also, I just looked over Netmap's Usenix paper from 2012, where they compare
> netmap against pktgen, and while they state the version of the FreeBSD kernel
> where they did the evaluation on, they just don't even mention the Linux'
> kernel version, their Linux kernel setup etc. Not even mentioning a comparison
> of PF_PACKET+fanout (similarly as the PF_RING project seems to avoid this
> comparison and only presents perf numbers where they just count packets !).
> Also, I've seen other papers published in 2012 on this topic, where they
> compare performance with a 2.6.2x kernel, hm, quite sad actually.
> --
> 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
--
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