netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/10] xfrm: remove flow cache

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: <CAKfDRXgbA1x9QS7ABiMwKxf11sYqfVggVXskdTNoL-CVDURhRA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:43:59 +0200
From:   Kristian Evensen <kristian.evensen@...il.com>
To:     Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        ilant@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/10] xfrm: remove flow cache

Hi,

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de> wrote:
> Can you test attached patch?
>
> I'd like to see how much the pcpu cache helps or if it actually hurts
> in your setup.
>
> Subject: [TEST PATCH 4.14.y] xfrm: remove pcpu policy cache
>
> We need to re-evaluate if this still buys anything after indirect calls
> got more expensive (retpolines).
> When pcpu xdst exists, it has to be validated first (which needs
> indirect calls).  So even if hit rate is good, it might be cheaper to
> allocate a new xdst entry.
>
> Furthermore, the current xdst cache needs to run with BH off, which
> is also not needed when its removed.
>
> Compile tested only.

Thanks! I will prepare a firmware for one of my devices tonight, start
testing tomorrow and report back when I have some results.

BR,
Kristian