From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932092AbeCIP5a (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2018 10:57:30 -0500 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:52972 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751122AbeCIP53 (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2018 10:57:29 -0500 Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2018 10:57:24 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <20180309.105724.519703919967625754.davem@davemloft.net> To: dwmw2@infradead.org Cc: fw@strlen.de, pablo@netfilter.org, rga@amazon.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: <1520609475.17937.42.camel@infradead.org> References: <20150306142932.GA15926@salvia> <20150306163700.GC20382@breakpoint.cc> <1520609475.17937.42.camel@infradead.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 25.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: David Woodhouse Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2018 15:31:15 +0000 > Eschewing a 15% speedup on the basis that "well, even though we've had > three of these already for a decade, we're worried that adding a fourth > might open the floodgates to further patches" does seem a little odd to > me, FWIW. The cost we are dealing with is a fundamental one which is a result of the hook design. Indirect calls are killer. Indirect calls are even more killer now in the age of Spectre and retpolines. I definitely would rather see the fundamental issue addressed rather than poking at it randomly with knobs for this case and that. Thank you.