On Friday 23 September 2005 19:09, Harald Welte wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 03:03:21PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > 1) No more central rwlock protecting each table (filter, nat, mangle,
> > > raw), but one lock per CPU. It avoids cache line ping pongs for each
> > > packet.
> >
> > Another useful change would be to not take the lock when there are no
> > rules. Currently just loading iptables has a large overhead.
>
> This is partially due to the netfilter hooks that are registered (so we
> always take nf_hook_slow() in the NF_HOOK() macro).
Not sure it's that. nf_hook_slow uses RCU, so it should be quite
fast.
> The default policies inside an iptables chain are internally implemented
> as a rule. Thus, policies as built-in rules have packet/byte counters.
That could be special cased and done lockless, with the counting
done per CPU.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |