From: Imre Palik <imrep.amz@gmail.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, stephen@networkplumber.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
imrep@amazon.de, aliguori@amazon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bridge: make it possible for packets to traverse the bridge withour hitting netfilter
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 17:08:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54DE2174.6040001@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150211.142936.951620487173949333.davem@davemloft.net>
On 02/11/15 23:29, David Miller wrote:
> From: Imre Palik <imrep.amz@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:32:24 +0100
>
>> From: "Palik, Imre" <imrep@amazon.de>
>>
>> The netfilter code is made with flexibility instead of performance in mind.
>> So when all we want is to pass packets between different interfaces, the
>> performance penalty of hitting netfilter code can be considerable, even when
>> all the firewalling is disabled for the bridge.
>>
>> This change makes it possible to disable netfilter both on a per bridge basis,
>> or for the whole bridging subsystem. In the case interesting to us, this can
>> lead to more than 10% speedup compared to the case when only bridge-iptables
>> are disabled.
>>
>> Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Imre Palik <imrep@amazon.de>
>
> Sorry, no.
>
> If I apply this, someone is going to try to submit a patch for every
> damn protocol layer to add a stupid hack like this.
Actually this is one of those patches. There is already a "stupid hack like this" for iptables and arptables. (Implemented before git history, and giving me 10% speedup. Many thanks, whoever did it.)
I also searched various LKML archives, and it seems the existing "stupid hacks" for iptables and arptables haven't resulted in any related patch submission in the last ten years. (Or my google-fu is weak.)
Moreover, I cannot imagine any other reasonable on/off switch for bridge-netfilter than these three. Of course, my imagination might be lacking there.
> Makw NF_HOOK() faster instead.
As far as I see, flexibility implies trashing the cache/TLB. So it is impossible to have flexibility and performance at the same time.
(Except possibly with self modifying code, but that has its own set of problems.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-13 16:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-10 9:32 [PATCH] bridge: make it possible for packets to traverse the bridge withour hitting netfilter Imre Palik
2015-02-11 22:29 ` David Miller
2015-02-13 16:08 ` Imre Palik [this message]
2015-02-13 16:37 ` Florian Westphal
2015-02-13 17:45 ` Imre Palik
2015-02-13 19:03 ` Florian Westphal
2015-02-23 15:24 ` Imre Palik
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=54DE2174.6040001@gmail.com \
--to=imrep.amz@gmail.com \
--cc=aliguori@amazon.com \
--cc=bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=imrep@amazon.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).