[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b1690508-f260-f1d1-b562-6553a03f5c9d@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:07:17 -0700
From: David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc: roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 1/4] ipv4: fib_rules: support match on sport,
dport and ip proto
On 2/12/18 2:05 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:49:33 -0800
>
>> Any setup with about 20 rules to be evaluated (per packet cost) will
>> feel the pain...
>>
>> I wonder if we could JIT/eBPF this thing.
I had the same comments -- overhead and ebpf and rules, but ...
>
> That's true for the software implementation angle.
>
> But I bet anyone actually using this thing will get it hardware
> offloaded.
>
what Dave said. ;-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists