Frank Myhr <fmyhr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I suppose intervals are more efficient than an equivalent group of single > > > elements? > > > > Memory-wise yes, performance-wise no. > > Also good to know. > > > > Is a concatenation like ipv4_addr . inet_service as efficient as a pure data > > > type with the same number of bits? > > > > Yes, as it makes no difference for the storage. The kernel doesn't know > > what its storing, it only knows the size of the element. > > > > It does store a 'type' information, but that is only used by nftables > > so it knows how to format the elements when listing the ruleset. > > Thanks for confirming, and for all of your detailed answers. > > If you find the time (and if it's comprehensible to a non-kernel > programmer): How does a dynamic set change the above situation? Does it use > a hash table for everything? Yes, dynamic set always uses 'rhashtable' backend, thats the only type that supports insertion from the packet path. We have 3 hash tables, a simple one for 32bit keys, one for static sets (table size decided at creation time) and rhashtable (table size is auto-resized as needed).
