From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755367AbbCFRtk (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2015 12:49:40 -0500 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:53546 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751134AbbCFRtf (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2015 12:49:35 -0500 Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 12:49:30 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <20150306.124930.216237089666857656.davem@davemloft.net> To: imrep.amz@gmail.com Cc: imrep@amazon.de, fw@strlen.de, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, stephen@networkplumber.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aliguori@amazon.com, nbd@openwrt.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] bridge: make it possible for packets to traverse the bridge without hitting netfilter From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <54F982B5.90108@gmail.com> References: <54EEF32D.2010202@amazon.de> <20150226.113431.238255529591339000.davem@davemloft.net> <54F982B5.90108@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 24.1 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.7 (shards.monkeyblade.net [149.20.54.216]); Fri, 06 Mar 2015 09:49:33 -0800 (PST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Imre Palik Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 11:34:29 +0100 > Removed those pieces of the packet pipeline that I don't necessarily > need one-by-one. Then measured their effect on small packet > performance. > > This was the only part that produced considerable effect. > > The pure speculation was about why the effect is more than 15% > increase in packet throughput, although the code path avoided > contains way less code than 15% of the packet pipeline. It seems, > Felix Fietkau profiled similar changes, and found my guess well > founded. Yes and that's the part being left out, the "why". That's part of what I expect in the justification. Look, we're not doing things this way. We need to find a clean and generic way to make the netfilter hooks as cheap as possible when netfilter rules are not in use.