From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Cc: Matt Bennett <Matt.Bennett@alliedtelesis.co.nz>,
"netdev\@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Luuk Paulussen <Luuk.Paulussen@alliedtelesis.co.nz>,
davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: Increasing skb->mark size
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2015 11:13:29 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87610ivv6u.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr3URKzAooiNH7i4kHVR0-TQjEAkQEdqjarAm6uxH7u-Mw@mail.gmail.com> (Lorenzo Colitti's message of "Sun, 29 Nov 2015 17:37:11 +0900")
Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:32 AM, Matt Bennett
> <Matt.Bennett@alliedtelesis.co.nz> wrote:
>> I'm emailing this list for feedback on the feasibility of increasing
>> skb->mark or adding a new field for marking. Perhaps this extension
>> could be done under a new CONFIG option.
>
> 64-bit marks (both skb->mark and sk->sk_mark) would be useful for
> hosts doing complex policy routing as well. Current Android releases
> use 20 of the 32 bits. If the mark were 64 bits, we could put the UID
> in it, and stop using ip rules to implement per-UID routing.
This would be be great. I've recently ran into some issues with
the overhead of the Android firewall setup.
So basically you need 4 extra bytes in sk_buff. How about:
- shrinking skb->priority to 2 byte
- skb_iff is either skb->dev->iff or 0. so it could be replaced with a
single bit flag for the 0 case.
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-01 19:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-24 20:32 Increasing skb->mark size Matt Bennett
2015-11-24 20:36 ` Florian Westphal
2015-11-24 20:56 ` Matt Bennett
2015-11-26 4:44 ` Luuk Paulussen
2015-11-30 2:08 ` Florian Westphal
2015-11-30 2:10 ` Lorenzo Colitti
2015-11-30 2:24 ` Florian Westphal
2015-11-29 8:37 ` Lorenzo Colitti
2015-11-30 1:58 ` David Miller
2015-11-30 4:10 ` Luuk Paulussen
2015-11-30 4:49 ` David Miller
2015-12-01 0:12 ` Luuk Paulussen
2015-12-01 3:55 ` David Miller
2015-12-01 4:57 ` Luuk Paulussen
2015-12-01 19:13 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2015-12-01 22:09 ` Daniel Borkmann
2015-12-02 2:58 ` Andi Kleen
2015-12-02 5:42 ` David Ahern
2015-12-02 17:29 ` David Miller
2015-12-02 3:57 ` Lorenzo Colitti
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=87610ivv6u.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=Luuk.Paulussen@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=Matt.Bennett@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=lorenzo@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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).