[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iKpty_j6C5_Fpt1NZhr1fhaMeRHsb2+9MM_0aPh9dCHjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 09:32:26 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
Jamie Bainbridge <jamie.bainbridge@...il.com>, Abhishek Rawal <rawal.abhishek92@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] ipv6: snmp: avoid performance issue with RATELIMITHOST
On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 9:24 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 13:25:50 +0000 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Addition of ICMP6_MIB_RATELIMITHOST in commit d0941130c9351
> > ("icmp: Add counters for rate limits") introduced a performance
> > drop in case of DOS (like receiving UDP packets
> > to closed ports).
> >
> > Per netns ICMP6_MIB_RATELIMITHOST tracking uses per-cpu
> > storage and is enough, we do not need per-device and slow tracking
> > for this metric.
>
> CI says:
Oh right I forgot the snmp_get_cpu_field64_batch() call.
I will send a V2 tomorrow.
Thank you
Powered by blists - more mailing lists