Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 02:49:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 02:49:32 -0400 Received: from bof.de ([195.4.223.10]:39572 "HELO oknodo.bof.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 02:49:32 -0400 Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 08:51:03 +0200 From: Patrick Schaaf To: Rusty Russell Cc: Andi Kleen , Harald Welte , Netfilter Mailing List , Linux Kernel mailing list , Patrick Schaaf Subject: Re: ip_conntrack_hash() problem Message-ID: <20020905085103.G19551@oknodo.bof.de> References: <20020904152626.A11438@wotan.suse.de> <20020905044436.0772A2C0DF@lists.samba.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20020905044436.0772A2C0DF@lists.samba.org>; from rusty@rustcorp.com.au on Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 10:39:40AM +1000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 765 Lines: 20 Rusty, > This work is already done: > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rusty/patches/Netfilter/conntrack_hashing.patch.gz Regarding the rehash check in ip_conntrack_find_get, wouldn't it be better to do that in the confirm function, where a new conntrack is put into the list? That's called a lot less often than _find_get, and should be logically equivalent. IOW, why wait until we _find_ an overly long list, when we can rehash at the point in time when it _became_ overly long? best regards Patrick - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/