Why do you need source validation if we are going to use it for a core router :) Is there anything else in there that may or may not be necessary depending on the circumstances that we are using the router for? Paul xerox@foonet.net http://www.httpd.net -----Original Message----- From: David S. Miller [mailto:davem@redhat.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 2:58 PM To: Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se Cc: ralph+d@istop.com; ralph@istop.com; hadi@shell.cyberus.ca; xerox@foonet.net; sim@netnation.com; fw@deneb.enyo.de; netdev@oss.sgi.com; linux-net@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Route cache performance under stress From: Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 20:34:50 +0200 I ripped out the route hash just to test the slow path. Seems like your patch was very good as we see the same performance w/o dst hash ~114 kpps. How did you "rip it out"? Just never look into the routing cache hash and never add entries there? If so, then yes it is excellent simulation for pure slow path. This is not purely an algorithmic problem. The highest cost thing we do in the slow path of input route processing is source validation. This requires real brains to eliminate. Actually, that's a good idea, if someone if brave just rip out fib_validate_source (just don't call it, should work for valid traffic) and see what happens :) - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
