netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: limited number if iptable rules on 64bit hosts

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: limited number if iptable rules on 64bit hosts
From: Bart De Schuymer <bdschuym@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 20:33:51 +0100
Cc: Olaf Hering <olh@xxxxxxx>, okir@xxxxxxx, brugolsky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050203110049.6b2d9c64.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20050202133851.GA9680@xxxxxxx> <20050202222516.GA15440@xxxxxxx> <20050202223853.GA29237@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050202225258.GA15563@xxxxxxx> <20050203111939.GI31570@xxxxxxx> <20050203104822.05be3281.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050203185928.GA22832@xxxxxxx> <20050203110049.6b2d9c64.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Op do, 03-02-2005 te 11:00 -0800, schreef David S. Miller:
> On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 19:59:28 +0100
> Olaf Hering <olh@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >  On Thu, Feb 03, David S. Miller wrote:
> > 
> > > The rule itself is replicated per-cpu as well to keep L2 cache
> > > accesses local per cpu on SMP systems.
> > 
> > Andy made this change, which helped on a dual box.
> 
> It might not help for Olaf's 128 cpu box though :-)
> 
> I think reconsider the idea of replicating the rule itself per-cpu.
> Also, this thread should have begun with netfilter-devel at least on
> the CC:, added.

Note that ebtables only has per-cpu counters.
I wonder what limits are seen on such systems for ebtables.

cheers,
Bart



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>