From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: 32 core net-next stack/netfilter "scaling" Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:19:18 -0800 Message-ID: <497E44F6.2010703@hp.com> References: <497E361B.30909@hp.com> <497E42F4.7080201@cosmosbay.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linux Network Development list , Netfilter Developers , Stephen Hemminger , Patrick McHardy To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from g1t0028.austin.hp.com ([15.216.28.35]:11031 "EHLO g1t0028.austin.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752667AbZAZXTW (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jan 2009 18:19:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: <497E42F4.7080201@cosmosbay.com> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > > Hi Rick, nice hardware you have :) Every once in a while the cobbler's children get some shoes to wear :) > > Stephen had a patch to nuke read_lock() from iptables, using RCU and seqlocks. > I hit this contention point even with low cost hardware, and quite standard application. > > I pinged him few days ago to try to finish the job with him, but it seems Stephen > is busy at the moment. > > Then conntrack (tcp sessions) is awfull, since it uses a single rwlock_t tcp_lock > that must be write_locked() for basically every handled tcp frame... > > How long is "not indefinitely" ? The system I am using is being borrowed under an open ended loan. However, my use of it can be thought of as being the "null process" in VMS - once anyone else wants it I have to get off of it. That said, I would guess that the chances of someone else trying to get that system are pretty small for the next four+ weeks. I had a similar system (PCIe I/O rather than PCI-X) for quite a few weeks before it got pulled-out from under. rick