netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 0/4] bridge: improve cache utilization

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: <2c59b56a-4a8b-0f32-31d1-1e8c44643958@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2017 19:09:09 +0100
From:   Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com,
        davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 0/4] bridge: improve cache utilization

On 31/01/17 17:41, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
>>
>> I agree with the first 3 patches, but not the last one.
>> Changing the API just for a performance hack is not necessary. Instead make
>> the algorithm smarter and use per-cpu values.
>>
> 
> Thanks for the feedback, I would very much prefer any of the other two approaches
> I tried (per-cpu pool and per-cpu for each fdb), from the two the second one -
> per-cpu for each fdb is much simpler, so would it be acceptable to do per-cpu allocation
> for each fdb ?
> 
> 
> 

Okay, after some more testing the version with per-cpu per-fdb allocations, at 300 000 fdb entries
I got 120 failed per-cpu allocs which seems okay. I'll wait a little more and will repost the series
with per-cpu allocations and without the RFC tag.

Thanks,
 Nik