| To: | Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Route cache performance under stress |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:45:34 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | ralph+d@xxxxxxxxx, ralph@xxxxxxxxx, hadi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xerox@xxxxxxxxxx, sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <16102.9418.43884.336925@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.51.0306101332300.8755@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030610.103234.116374169.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <16102.9418.43884.336925@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 20:34:50 +0200 I ripped out the route hash just to test the slow path. I want to point out an error in such simulations. It doesn't eliminate some of the most expensive part of the routing cache, the 'dst' management. All of that still happens even after your patch. A better simulation of a "pure slowpath" would be to move the DST entry into the fib entries themselves. That is a lot more work, but it would validate the various ideas and claims being made. For example, it would say for sure whether eliminating the routing cache is a win or not for DoS traffic. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] Panic in ipv6_add_dev, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 2.5.70] net-sysfs parent ref count, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Robert Olsson |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Robert Olsson |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |