From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulrich Weber Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] sctp: fix compile issue with disabled CONFIG_NET_NS Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 14:07:51 +0200 Message-ID: <502E3417.9070602@sophos.com> References: <20120816112449.GA17354@uweber-WS> <87fw7m64v9.fsf@xmission.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: To: "Eric W. Biederman" Return-path: Received: from mx4.sophos.com ([216.47.234.213]:44972 "EHLO mx4.sophos.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754143Ab2HQMPz (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Aug 2012 08:15:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87fw7m64v9.fsf@xmission.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Eric, On 08/16/2012 08:58 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Ulrich do you get any performance advantage by disabling the network=20 > namespace? I am wondering if there is any benefit to keeping it=20 > possible to disable the network namespace? The original reason for th= e=20 > option was so that distributions and other who wanted to avoid new=20 > code could protect their users, and that reasons seems to have long=20 > since passed. we just disable most of the options we don't use. I have no idea, if there are any performance advantages here... Cheers Ulrich --=20 Ulrich Weber | ulrich.weber@sophos.com | Senior Software Engineer Astaro - a Sophos company | Amalienbadstr 41 | 76227 Karlsruhe | German= y Phone +49-721-25516-0 | Fax =96200 | www.astaro.com