netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] route: fix breakage after moving lwtunnel state

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: <20150826221330.GB31292@pox.localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 27 Aug 2015 00:13:30 +0200
From:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
To:	Jiri Benc <jbenc@...hat.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] route: fix breakage after moving lwtunnel state

On 08/26/15 at 06:19pm, Jiri Benc wrote:
> might be a noise. However, there's definitely room for performance
> improvement here, the lwtunnel vxlan throughput is at about ~40% of the
> non-vxlan throughput. I did not spend too much time on analyzing this, yet,
> but it's clear the dst_entry layout is not our biggest concern here.

I'm currently working on reducing the overhead for VXLAN and Gre and
effectively Geneve once Pravin's work is in. The main disadvantage
of lwt based flow tunneling is the additional fib_lookup() performed
for each packet. It seems tempting to cache the tunnel endpoint dst in
the lwt state of the overlay route. It will usually point to the same
dst for every packet. The cache behaviour if dependant on no fib rules
are and the route is a single nexthop route.

Did you test with a card that features UDP encapsulation offloads?
--
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