From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 0/3] net: optimize ICMP-reply code path
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 09:43:52 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAM_iQpWVokaBs=mvG+PKArVx_t3xVg5n9SWjj69Uu=m-ywyH+w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170109150246.30215.63371.stgit@firesoul>
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 7:03 AM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer
<brouer@redhat.com> 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?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-09 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-09 15:03 [net-next PATCH 0/3] net: optimize ICMP-reply code path Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-01-09 15:04 ` [net-next PATCH 1/3] Revert "icmp: avoid allocating large struct on stack" Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-01-09 17:42 ` Cong Wang
2017-01-09 17:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-01-09 17:59 ` Cong Wang
2017-01-09 18:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-01-09 18:52 ` David Miller
2017-01-09 20:53 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-01-10 18:06 ` Cong Wang
2017-01-10 18:12 ` David Miller
2017-01-10 18:44 ` Cong Wang
2017-01-10 18:48 ` Cong Wang
2017-01-10 18:54 ` David Miller
2017-01-12 22:46 ` Cong Wang
2017-01-10 20:08 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-01-10 21:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-01-12 22:21 ` Cong Wang
2017-01-10 21:41 ` Joe Perches
2017-01-09 19:33 ` Joe Perches
2017-01-10 18:01 ` Cong Wang
2017-01-09 18:47 ` David Miller
2017-01-09 17:42 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-01-09 15:04 ` [net-next PATCH 2/3] net: reduce cycles spend on ICMP replies that gets rate limited Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-01-09 17:44 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-01-11 17:15 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-06-04 7:11 ` Florian Weimer
2017-06-04 14:38 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-06-05 14:22 ` Florian Weimer
2017-01-09 15:04 ` [net-next PATCH 3/3] net: for rate-limited ICMP replies save one atomic operation Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-01-09 17:44 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-01-09 17:43 ` Cong Wang [this message]
2017-01-09 17:56 ` [net-next PATCH 0/3] net: optimize ICMP-reply code path Eric Dumazet
2017-01-09 20:49 ` David Miller
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='CAM_iQpWVokaBs=mvG+PKArVx_t3xVg5n9SWjj69Uu=m-ywyH+w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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).