Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:11:48 +0300 From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/modules/ipdivert Makefile src/sys/netinetin_proto.c ip_divert.c ip_divert.h ip_fw2.c ip_fw_pfil.c Message-ID: <20041021071148.GA46126@ip.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <41758DF2.D3C1BD26@freebsd.org> References: <200410192114.i9JLEvjQ001574@repoman.freebsd.org> <41758BF6.5020909@freebsd.org> <41758DF2.D3C1BD26@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 11:58:10PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: > Scott Long wrote: [...] > > This is interesting. Have you measured performance/latency with this > > new scheme? Is it still possible to compile IPDIVERT into the kernel > > and avoid the indirect calls? > > IPDIVERT can hardly be called a performance/latency critical path. The > entire copyout of the packet to userland for nat'ing and copyin again > make the function pointer indirection such a small factor that it doesn't > make any difference whatsoever. > Err. divert(4) sockets can also be accessed through the ng_ksocket(4) interface, in which case no userland-kernel copying takes place. So the performance does matter. Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBd2E0qRfpzJluFF4RAttVAJkBN+xNuTuSrz/0LnKQB581uPavzgCgjlQQ OJDcsRfxOgRlEwkmWUNCXiM= =b24A -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041021071148.GA46126>