From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11CFCC10F03 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 17:27:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE766206A3 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 17:27:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729369AbfDWR12 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Apr 2019 13:27:28 -0400 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.9]:39766 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728809AbfDWR12 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Apr 2019 13:27:28 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:601:9f80:35cd::d71]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: davem-davemloft) by shards.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C26B133E8184; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:27:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:27:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20190423.102726.2303280925947408873.davem@davemloft.net> To: fw@strlen.de Cc: vakul.garg@nxp.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: ipsec tunnel performance degrade From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20190423162521.sn4lfd5iia566f44@breakpoint.cc> References: <20190423055645.rzuau3yb64wkwwyc@breakpoint.cc> <20190423162521.sn4lfd5iia566f44@breakpoint.cc> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.8 on Emacs 26.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.12 (shards.monkeyblade.net [149.20.54.216]); Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:27:27 -0700 (PDT) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org From: Florian Westphal Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 18:25:21 +0200 > Vakul Garg wrote: >> > Vakul Garg wrote: >> > > > Do you use xfrm interfaces? >> > > >> > > I don't think so. I use setkey to create policies/SAs. >> > > Can you please give me some hint about it? >> > >> > Then you're not using ipsec interfaces. >> > >> Instead of creating policies/SA using setkey, I shifted to using 'ip xfrm' commands. >> With this, I get good performance improvement (20% better in one case). >> Now xfrm_state_find() function is not taking much cpu. > > Thats very strange, I have no explanation for this. > It would be good to find the cause, PF_KEY and 'ip xfrm' > are just different control plane frontends, they should have no impact > on data path performance. I wonder if the masks and/or prefixes that end up being used are subtly different for some reason.