Re: link mbufs/inpcbs to pf_states, not pf_state_keys

2023-09-29 Thread Alexander Bluhm
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 06:30:31AM +0200, Alexandr Nedvedicky wrote: > Currently we have something like this: > > { mbuf, pcb } <-> state key <-> { state, state ... } > > with this diff we get to: > > { mbuf, pcb } <-> state <-> state key > > Basically when we do

Re: link mbufs/inpcbs to pf_states, not pf_state_keys

2023-08-21 Thread Alexandr Nedvedicky
Hello, On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 12:21:59AM +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 12:02:35PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote: > > there are links between the pcb/socket layer and pf as an optimisation, > > and links on mbufs between both sides of a forwarded connection. > > these links

Re: link mbufs/inpcbs to pf_states, not pf_state_keys

2023-08-21 Thread Alexander Bluhm
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 12:02:35PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote: > there are links between the pcb/socket layer and pf as an optimisation, > and links on mbufs between both sides of a forwarded connection. > these links let pf skip an rb tree lookup for outgoing packets. > > right now these links

link mbufs/inpcbs to pf_states, not pf_state_keys

2023-08-16 Thread David Gwynne
there are links between the pcb/socket layer and pf as an optimisation, and links on mbufs between both sides of a forwarded connection. these links let pf skip an rb tree lookup for outgoing packets. right now these links are between pf_state_key structs, which are the things that contain the