Re: multiple wireguard interface and kworker ressources

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Hi Nicolas,

It looks to me like some resources are indeed expended in adding those
interfaces. Not that much that would be problematic -- are you seeing
a problematic case? -- but still a non-trivial amount.

I tracked it down to WireGuard's instantiation of xt_hashlimit, which
does some ugly vmalloc, and it's call into the power state
notification system, which uses a naive O(n) algorithm for insertion.
I might have a way of amortizing on module insertion, which would
speed things up. But I wonder -- what is the practical detriment of
spending a few extra cycles on `ip link add`? What's your use case
where this would actually be a problem?

Thanks,
Jason
___
WireGuard mailing list
WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard

Re: multiple wireguard interface and kworker ressources

[nicolas prochazka]

Hello again,
with 0.0.20170613  , i can reproduce a big kworker cpu time consumption
Regards,
nicolas

2017-06-13 14:48 GMT+02:00 Jason A. Donenfeld :
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> I'll look into this. However, you need to update WireGuard to the
> latest version, which is 0.0.20170613. I can't provide help for
> outdated versions.
>
> Jason
___
WireGuard mailing list
WireGuard@lists.zx2c4.com
https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard