netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] openvswitch: Use zerocopy if applicable when performing the upcall

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: <CAEP_g=87CuiS92YtCZ1V1ME05qq0jGWD9p1WgKZ2jaaG1AWS7w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 24 May 2013 10:24:50 -0700
From:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"dev@...nvswitch.org" <dev@...nvswitch.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] openvswitch: Use zerocopy if applicable when
 performing the upcall

On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch> wrote:
> From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...ap.localdomain>
>
> Avoids a memcpy() that is expensive for large packets:
>
> from:
>   4.51%  [kernel]                      [k] memcpy
> to:
>   1.20%  [kernel]                      [k] memcpy
>   1.01%  [kernel]                      [k] skb_zerocopy
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>

Does this have any impact on small packets? Those are usually the
common case (i.e. TCP SYN) and I think this is slightly less optimal
for those.
--
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