Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2013 21:42:32 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@yandex-team.ru> Cc: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@freebsd.org>, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Net <net@freebsd.org>, "Andrey V. Elsukov" <ae@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Network stack changes Message-ID: <CAJ-VmokmaVds-DVj6yYAWSSwg=RBYJLeFfg8ae-Oj3_bOdcRyA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <523F4F14.9090404@yandex-team.ru> References: <521E41CB.30700@yandex-team.ru> <CAJ-Vmo=N=HnZVCD41ZmDg2GwNnoa-tD0J0QLH80x=f7KA5d%2BUg@mail.gmail.com> <523F4F14.9090404@yandex-team.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi! On 22 September 2013 13:12, Alexander V. Chernikov <melifaro@yandex-team.ru>wrote: > I'm thinking the same way, but we're stuck with 'forwarding lookup' due > to problem with egress interface pointer, as I mention earlier. However it > is interesting to see how much it helps, regardless of locking. > > Currently I'm thinking that we should try to change radix to something > different (it seems that it can be checked fast) and see what happened. > Luigi's performance numbers for our radix are too awful, and there is a > patch implementing alternative trie: > http://info.iet.unipi.it/~**luigi/papers/20120601-dxr.pdf<http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/papers/20120601-dxr.pdf>; > http://www.nxlab.fer.hr/dxr/**stable_8_20120824.diff<http://www.nxlab.fer.hr/dxr/stable_8_20120824.diff>; > > So, I can make educated guesses about why this is better for forwarding workloads. I'd like to characterize it though. So, what's it doing that's better? better locking? better caching behaviour? less memory lookups? etc. Thanks, -adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmokmaVds-DVj6yYAWSSwg=RBYJLeFfg8ae-Oj3_bOdcRyA>