netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 1/4] net: SO_INCOMING

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: <1444383946.27760.50.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:45:46 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 1/4] net: SO_INCOMING_CPU setsockopt()
 support

On Thu, 2015-10-08 at 20:40 -0700, Tom Herbert wrote:

> Do we care about losing this optimization? It's not done in IPv4 but I
> can imagine that there is some arguments that address comparisons in
> IPv6 are more expensive hence this might make sense...

I do not think we care. You removed the 'optimization' in IPv4 in commit
ba418fa357a7b ("soreuseport: UDP/IPv4 implementation") back in 2013 and
really no one noticed.

The important factor here is the number of cache lines taken to traverse
the list...


--
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