[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170418080902.GA25804@vergenet.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 17:09:04 +0900
From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan <subashab@...eaurora.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ipv6: Add early demux handler for UDP
unicast
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 11:22:01AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 12:11 -0700, Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan wrote:
> > On 2017-03-08 11:40, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > Well, this 'optimization' actually hurts when UDP sockets are not
> > > connected, since this adds an extra cache line miss per incoming
> > > packet.
> > >
> > > (DNS servers for example)
> >
> > Hi Eric
> >
> > Thanks for your comments. Would it be preferable to disable early demux
> > for the
> > servers with large unconnected workloads in that case?
>
> Well, many servers handle both TCP and UDP.
>
> For TCP, there is no question about early demux, this is definitely a
> win.
>
> We probably should have one sysctl to enable TCP early demux, one for
> UDP early demux.
If early demux is a clear win for TCP then I wonder if it is
unnecessary and by some leap also undesirable to have a configuration
knob for that case.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists