netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: Check skb->rxhash in gro

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: <20140113.115913.1269834557058575064.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 13 Jan 2014 11:59:13 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	therbert@...gle.com
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Check skb->rxhash in gro_receive

From: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:27:20 -0800

> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 20:54 -0800, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>> When initializing a gro_list for a packet, first check the rxhash of
>>> the incoming skb against that of the skb's in the list. This should be
>>> a very strong inidicator of whether the flow is going to be matched,
>>> and potentially allows a lot of other checks to be short circuited.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm... this idea was discussed in the past. I used it when attempting to
>> use a hash table instead of a gro_list last year.
>>
>> Unfortunately this added lot of cycles when rxhash is not provided by
>> hardware, and my tests found it was not a win.
>>
>> Remember : in most cases, gro_list contains one flow, so this test does
>> nothing special but adds overhead.
> 
> I don't understand what your basis is that gro_list in most cases
> contains one flow

It also doesn't jive well with Eric's recent patch to adjust the GRO
overflow strategy (600adc18eba823f9fd8ed5fec8b04f11dddf3884 ("net:
gro: change GRO overflow strategy"))

:-)

I sort of like Tom's idea to optimistically compare the hash, if we
do in fact have one already.

Eric would the change be OK if Tom did it that way?
--
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