From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cong Wang Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 0/3] net: optimize ICMP-reply code path Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 09:43:52 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20170109150246.30215.63371.stgit@firesoul> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers , Eric Dumazet To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer Return-path: Received: from mail-qk0-f193.google.com ([209.85.220.193]:34698 "EHLO mail-qk0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936615AbdAIRoN (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2017 12:44:13 -0500 Received: by mail-qk0-f193.google.com with SMTP id e1so17093112qkh.1 for ; Mon, 09 Jan 2017 09:44:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20170109150246.30215.63371.stgit@firesoul> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 7:03 AM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > Use-case: The specific case I experienced this being a bottleneck is, > sending UDP packets to a port with no listener, which obviously result > in kernel replying with ICMP Destination Unreachable (type:3), Port > Unreachable (code:3), which cause the bottleneck. Why this is a case we should care about for performance?