From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kim Phillips Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv4: fix ipsec forward performance regression Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 13:58:51 -0500 Message-ID: <20111103135851.2229247682ec040d653479e1@freescale.com> References: <1319360590.6180.75.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20111024.030203.404195331212003955.davem@davemloft.net> <20111101185022.b156ea957baf286f1bf00f9c@freescale.com> <20111101.203430.110242050755204948.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: , , , To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from db3ehsobe006.messaging.microsoft.com ([213.199.154.144]:20473 "EHLO DB3EHSOBE006.bigfish.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933865Ab1KCS7w (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2011 14:59:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20111101.203430.110242050755204948.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 20:34:30 -0400 David Miller wrote: > From: Kim Phillips > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 18:50:22 -0500 > > > -stable maintainers, please consider the following two upstream > > commits for inclusion in upcoming v3.0.x [1] stable releases: > > I submit networking stable fixes as needed, so please make such > requests to me. > > I haven't submitted this change yet because I want it to sit a bit > longer in Linus's tree to make sure there aren't any unwanted > side-effects. I see b732339 (ipv4: fix ipsec forward performance regression) has been added to the 3.0- and 3.1-stable trees. b732339 increases IPSec fwding performance from 0.2kpps to ~3.5kpps. However, adding upstream commit aa1c366 (net: Handle different key sizes between address families in flow cache) brings performance back up to 2.6.38 levels, i.e., ~44kpps. So can aa1c366 also be queued to the v2.6.39 and v3.0 stable trees? Thanks, Kim