netdev - Re: irq disable in __netdev_alloc

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1410281445470.28700@gentwo.org>
Date:	Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:46:22 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
cc:	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: irq disable in __netdev_alloc_frag() ?

On Mon, 27 Oct 2014, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> Unfortunately, SLUB is more expensive than SLAB for many networking workloads.

hackbench performs better with SLUB.

> The cost of disabling interrupts is pure noise compared to cache line misses.
>
> SLUB has poor behavior compared to SLAB with alien caches,
> even with the side effect that 'struct page' is 64 bytes aligned
> instead of being 56 bytes with SLAB
>
> Note that I am not doing SLUB/SLAB tests every day, so it might be
> better nowadays.

Well we did some intensive work on these issues a couple of years ago.

--
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