netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/5] netfilter: nft_rbtree: no need for spinlock from set destroy path

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: <1411473245.26859.188.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Tue, 23 Sep 2014 04:54:05 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
Cc:	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] netfilter: nft_rbtree: no need for spinlock from
 set destroy path

On Tue, 2014-09-23 at 13:01 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:

> I'll send a follow up patch for nf-next to use rb_first() in that
> patch. Thanks Eric.

I did a test, and its indeed a bit faster to use rb_first(), by about 5%

Real win is to be able to build a chain using rb_first()/rb_next(),
(leaving the tree as is), then deleting the items in the chain, and
simply reset rb_root.

This only needs to reuse one pointer to store the item->next pointer.

This is then about ~50% faster, because we do not constantly rebalance
tree for every removed item.

--
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