netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] net: Add SO_REUSEPORT_LISTEN

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:	Thu, 24 Mar 2016 19:24:35 +0100
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	Tolga Ceylan <tolga.ceylan@...il.com>
Cc:	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Craig Gallek <cgallek@...gle.com>,
	Josh Snyder <josh@...e406.com>,
	Aaron Conole <aconole@...heb.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] net: Add SO_REUSEPORT_LISTEN_OFF socket option as
 drain mode

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:20:49AM -0700, Tolga Ceylan wrote:
> I would appreciate a conceptual description on how this would work
> especially for a common scenario
> as described by Willy. My initial impression was that a coordinator
> (master) process takes this
> responsibility to adjust BPF filters as children come and go.

Indeed that would help, I don't know where to start from for now.

> Two popular software has similar use cases: nginx and haproxy. Another
> concern is with the
> introduction of BPF itself, should we expect a performance drop in
> these applications?

Knowing how picky Eric is about performance in such areas, I'm not
worried a single second about adopting something he recommends :-)
I just need to ensure it covers our users' needs. And maybe the
solution I mentionned in the other e-mail could work.

Willy