On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:42:30PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 04/19/2017 10:02 PM, Andy Gospodarek wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 09:58:56PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > >
> > > As I argued in NetConf presentation[1] (from slide #9) we need a port
> > > mapping table
On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 00:51:31 +0200
Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 04/19/2017 10:02 PM, Andy Gospodarek wrote:
> [...]
> > and then lookup this dest in a table we have the option to make that
> > dest an ifindex/socket/other.
> >
> > I did also look at JohnF's patch and I do
[...]
> JohnF, any test results with this you can share? Presumably you tested with
> virtio-net, right?
>
For my patches using the xdp_redirect with virtio-net showed no measurable
difference from running just the straight XDP_TX in the PPS column. However
virtio_net XDP_TX was quite low to
On 04/19/2017 10:02 PM, Andy Gospodarek wrote:
[...]
and then lookup this dest in a table we have the option to make that
dest an ifindex/socket/other.
I did also look at JohnF's patch and I do like the simplicity of the redirect
action and new ndo_xdp_xmit and how it moves towards a way to
On 04/19/2017 10:02 PM, Andy Gospodarek wrote:
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 09:58:56PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
As I argued in NetConf presentation[1] (from slide #9) we need a port
mapping table (instead of using ifindex'es). Both for supporting
other "port" types than net_devices
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 09:58:56PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>
> As I argued in NetConf presentation[1] (from slide #9) we need a port
> mapping table (instead of using ifindex'es). Both for supporting
> other "port" types than net_devices (think sockets), and for
> sandboxing what
On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 14:33:27 +0200
Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 04/19/2017 02:00 PM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:54:45 -0700
> > John Fastabend wrote:
> >> On 17-04-18 12:58 PM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> >>>
>
On 04/19/2017 02:00 PM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:54:45 -0700
John Fastabend wrote:
On 17-04-18 12:58 PM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
As I argued in NetConf presentation[1] (from slide #9) we need a port
mapping table (instead of using
Hi,
On 18.04.2017 21:58, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>
> As I argued in NetConf presentation[1] (from slide #9) we need a port
> mapping table (instead of using ifindex'es). Both for supporting
> other "port" types than net_devices (think sockets), and for
> sandboxing what XDP can bypass.
>
On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:54:45 -0700
John Fastabend wrote:
> On 17-04-18 12:58 PM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> >
> > As I argued in NetConf presentation[1] (from slide #9) we need a port
> > mapping table (instead of using ifindex'es). Both for supporting
> > other
On 17-04-18 12:58 PM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>
> As I argued in NetConf presentation[1] (from slide #9) we need a port
> mapping table (instead of using ifindex'es). Both for supporting
> other "port" types than net_devices (think sockets), and for
> sandboxing what XDP can bypass.
>
> I
As I argued in NetConf presentation[1] (from slide #9) we need a port
mapping table (instead of using ifindex'es). Both for supporting
other "port" types than net_devices (think sockets), and for
sandboxing what XDP can bypass.
I want to create a new XDP action called XDP_REDIRECT, that
12 matches
Mail list logo