netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2 net-next] net: move qdisc ingress filtering code where it belongs

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]

Date:	Sun, 10 May 2015 20:24:14 +0200
From:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, jhs@...atatu.com,
	daniel@...earbox.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 net-next] net: move qdisc ingress filtering code
 where it belongs

On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 11:05:28AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On 5/10/15 10:59 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> >No, Daniel is *not* benchmarking the netif_received_core() with no
> >filtering at all.
> 
> sorry, not true. We did benchmark all combinations. Daniel posted
> his, I'll send numbers from my box as well.

Daniel said:

"The extra indirection layers however, are not necessary for calling
into ingress qdisc. pktgen calling locally into netif_receive_skb()
with a dummy u32, single CPU result on a Supermicro X10SLM-F, Xeon
E3-1240: before ~21,1 Mpps, after patch ~22,9 Mpps."

That explicitly refers to u32, hence qdisc ingress, so he did *not*
post any number of the use case I'm indicating.
--
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