From: Michael Bellion and Thomas Heinz <nf@hipac.org>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
Cc: hadi@cyberus.ca, linux-net@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] High Performance Packet Classifiction for tc framework
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:56:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F390021.5040705@hipac.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030811224050.59bc36fe.davem@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1446 bytes --]
Hi David
You wrote:
> The ipv4 FIB hash tables tackle exactly this problem. The resulting
> worse cast complexity is O(n_bits_in_prefix_mask).
>
> The problem you've described is exactly the same as trying to use
> hashing for routing tables.
Yes, that's true for the 1-dimensional case. You refer to the
following algorithm, don't you?
min_prio := infinity
match_rule := nil
for all list_entries e: { // at most w+1 entries where w is the bit
// width of the keys
rule = lookup(hash(e), packet) // let's assume O(1) here
if (prio(rule) < min_prio) {
min_prio = prio(rule)
match_rule = rule
}
}
return match_rule
This algorithm has running time O(w).
[In fact it's O(number of different prefix lengths) which is O(w)
in the worst case.]
But what about the d-dimensional case? If you extend this
approach to handle rules with d prefix based matches you end
up in a running time of: O(w^d)
(assuming w to be the max. bit width)
This is definitely not desirable.
Regards,
+-----------------------+----------------------+
| Michael Bellion | Thomas Heinz |
| <mbellion@hipac.org> | <creatix@hipac.org> |
+-----------------------+----------------------+
| High Performance Packet Classification |
| nf-hipac: http://www.hipac.org/ |
+----------------------------------------------+
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 251 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-12 14:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-14 8:45 [RFC] High Performance Packet Classifiction for tc framework Michael Bellion and Thomas Heinz
2003-07-16 5:02 ` jamal
2003-07-17 13:13 ` Michael Bellion and Thomas Heinz
2003-08-03 18:14 ` jamal
2003-08-04 13:17 ` Michael Bellion and Thomas Heinz
2003-08-04 15:51 ` jamal
2003-08-05 22:21 ` Michael Bellion and Thomas Heinz
2003-08-07 19:58 ` jamal
2003-08-07 20:05 ` David S. Miller
2003-08-08 21:51 ` jamal
2003-08-09 0:01 ` David S. Miller
2003-08-11 22:39 ` Michael Bellion and Thomas Heinz
2003-08-12 2:57 ` jamal
2003-08-12 14:56 ` Michael Bellion and Thomas Heinz
2003-08-12 15:41 ` jamal
2003-08-12 5:40 ` David S. Miller
2003-08-12 14:29 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-08-12 15:39 ` Michael Bellion and Thomas Heinz
2003-08-15 14:28 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-08-13 17:28 ` Ralph Doncaster
2003-08-13 19:17 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-08-13 21:10 ` Ralph Doncaster
2003-08-13 23:21 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-08-12 14:56 ` Michael Bellion and Thomas Heinz [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3F390021.5040705@hipac.org \
--to=nf@hipac.org \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=linux-net@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).