From: Martin Wilck <Martin.Wilck@Fujitsu-Siemens.com>
To: Netfilter Mailing List <netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Patrick Schaaf <bof@bof.de>, Harald Welte <laforge@gnumonks.org>,
Andreas Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Subject: ip_conntrack_hash() problem
Date: 04 Sep 2002 14:33:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1031142822.3314.116.camel@biker.pdb.fsc.net> (raw)
Hi,
I posted a patch to netfilter-devel a week ago that fixes a severe
performance problem with ip_conntrack_hash() (see below).
Harald rejected it (sort of), telling me I should have read past threads
about the hash function first.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=netfilter-devel&m=103054090215896&w=2
I think I have to insist on this, though.
Although it certainly isn't the "optimal" hash function for
ip_conntrack, it fixes a problem that leads to extremely unbalanced
hashing in some situations, in particular in a simple
client<->router<->webserver scenario.
In that case, all connection tuples from server to client, i.e. 50% of
all tuples, end up in the same bucket(!), as I showed in my posting to
netfilter-devel.
This happens if the hash size is a power of 2, which is the default on
most newer machines.
The fix is rather trivial (mainly the port numbers are accounted for
outside the ntohl() function), and therefore I'd like to ask again that
it be applied.
Unless I am mistaken, the past discussions were mainly concerned with
fine-tuning of the hash function, which is a topic my patch doesn't
address, and can easily be done on top of it.
Regards,
Martin
--
Martin Wilck Phone: +49 5251 8 15113
Fujitsu Siemens Computers Fax: +49 5251 8 20409
Heinz-Nixdorf-Ring 1 mailto:Martin.Wilck@Fujitsu-Siemens.com
D-33106 Paderborn http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/primergy
next reply other threads:[~2002-09-04 12:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-04 12:33 Martin Wilck [this message]
2002-09-04 12:56 ` Harald Welte
2002-09-04 13:24 ` Martin Wilck
2002-09-04 13:26 ` Andi Kleen
2002-09-05 0:39 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-05 6:21 ` Patrick Schaaf
2002-09-05 6:24 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-05 6:33 ` Patrick Schaaf
2002-09-05 6:32 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-05 6:39 ` Patrick Schaaf
2002-09-05 6:40 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-05 13:37 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-05 11:14 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-05 6:51 ` Patrick Schaaf
2002-09-05 7:19 ` Martin Wilck
2002-09-05 11:15 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-05 11:54 ` Andi Kleen
2002-09-05 17:55 ` Patrick Schaaf
2002-09-05 18:24 ` Martin Wilck
2002-09-05 8:19 ` Harald Welte
2002-09-04 13:40 ` Martin Wilck
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=1031142822.3314.116.camel@biker.pdb.fsc.net \
--to=martin.wilck@fujitsu-siemens.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=bof@bof.de \
--cc=laforge@gnumonks.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®