Kirill Korotaev <dev@sw.ru> writes:


>> Ideally we can optimize the bridge code or something equivalent to
>> it so that we can take one look at the destination mac address and
>> know which network namespace we should be in.  Potentially moving this
>> work to hardware when the hardware supports multiple queues.
> yes, we can hack the bridge, so that packets coming out of eth devices
> can go directly to the container and get out of veth devices from
> inside the container.
>
>> If we can get the overhead out of the routing code that would be
>> tremendous.  However I think it may be more realistic to get the
>> overhead out of the ethernet bridging code where we know we don't need
>> to modify the packet.
> Why not optimize both? :)

If the optimizations are safe and correct I don't have a problem.

When we seem to have multiple copies of a packet in circulation and
we skip a what appears to be a required copy on write, I'm dubious.

Although the more I look at suggested optimization the less dubious I
am as it appears all we are skipping is a ttl decrement and the cow
flag exclusively applies to the data chunk and not the header chunk of
the packet whatever that means.

However we still need to guard against a loop in our routing table
setup between multiple guests.

Eric
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers