From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] [NET]: Rethink mark field in struct flowi Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 14:34:03 +0100 Message-ID: <20061109133403.GD8693@postel.suug.ch> References: <20061109112735.577771022@lsx.localdomain> <20061109113245.573179984@lsx.localdomain> <200611091423.02504.dada1@cosmosbay.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from postel.suug.ch ([194.88.212.233]:65233 "EHLO postel.suug.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965992AbWKINdm (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Nov 2006 08:33:42 -0500 To: Eric Dumazet Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200611091423.02504.dada1@cosmosbay.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org * Eric Dumazet 2006-11-09 14:23 > I give a big NACK to this patch. > > By moving fwmark outside of union, you basically touch more cache lines in > lookups. I have many machines doing XX.XXX of lookups per second, with long > chains, already using 10% of CPU. I am sure a lot of other machines would > suffer with this patch, especially machines with 32 bytes cache lines. > > For IPV4 lookups, compare offset of fwmark before your patch and after. > The size of ip6_u is so large that moving fwmark after nl_u union is not an > option. Many packets in flight on the Internet are still IPV4. Would you be happy if mark is moved in front of the union after iif?