Skip to content

perf(netstack2): optimize subnet rule matching with BART - #204

Merged
oschwartz10612 merged 2 commits into
fosrl:devfrom
LaurenceJJones:optimize-subnet-lookup-bart
Mar 3, 2026
Merged

perf(netstack2): optimize subnet rule matching with BART#204
oschwartz10612 merged 2 commits into
fosrl:devfrom
LaurenceJJones:optimize-subnet-lookup-bart

Conversation

@LaurenceJJones

@LaurenceJJones LaurenceJJones commented Dec 16, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Community Contribution License Agreement

By creating this pull request, I grant the project maintainers an unlimited,
perpetual license to use, modify, and redistribute these contributions under any terms they
choose, including both the AGPLv3 and the Fossorial Commercial license terms. I
represent that I have the right to grant this license for all contributed content.

Description

Replace O(n) map-based subnet rule matching with BART (Binary Aggregated Range Tree) using Supernets() for O(log n) prefix matching.

Performance improvements:

  • 39x faster for no-match cases (critical for firewall/security)
  • 1.9x faster for adding rules
  • Better scaling characteristics

Trade-offs:

  • Small rule sets (10-100): 1.2-1.4x slower for matches (20-30ns overhead)
  • Large rule sets (100+): 1.3x faster
  • No-match: 39x faster (original checks all rules, BART uses O(log n) tree lookup)

The no-match performance is particularly important for security/firewall scenarios where many packets are rejected. BART can determine 'no match' in ~7 tree operations vs checking all 100+ rules.

Dependencies:

  • Added: github.com/gaissmai/bart v0.26.0

Files:

  • netstack2/subnet_lookup.go: New BART-based implementation
  • netstack2/proxy.go: Removed old map-based implementation, updated to use BART

How to test?

Performance when routing through netstack2, the older implementation was O(n) meaning as subnets rules / routes increase the time depending on where the rule was in the slice would mean extra overhead. Switching to BART the matching is now O(k) where k is number of bytes in the address this means the performance is similar for 1-10 rules vs 100+ rules.

however a important key stats is that lower amount of rules do see a degradation in perf about 20-30ns overhead compared to the former O(n) simply because iterating over 10 rules can be performant, but when taking into the bigger picture and if we want to route maybe lots and lots of different rules then BART is a good choice.

@LaurenceJJones
LaurenceJJones force-pushed the optimize-subnet-lookup-bart branch from 84fa920 to ed34e91 Compare February 22, 2026 14:21
Replace O(n) map-based subnet rule matching with BART (Binary Aggregated Range Tree) using Supernets() for O(log n) prefix matching.

Performance improvements:
- 1.3x faster for large rule sets (1000+ rules)
- 39x faster for no-match cases (critical for firewall/security)
- 1.9x faster for adding rules
- Better scaling characteristics

Trade-offs:
- Small rule sets (10-100): 1.2-1.4x slower for matches (20-30ns overhead)
- Large rule sets (1000+): 1.3x faster
- No-match: 39x faster (original checks all rules, BART uses O(log n) tree lookup)

The no-match performance is particularly important for security/firewall scenarios where many packets are rejected. BART can determine 'no match' in ~7 tree operations vs checking all 100+ rules.

Dependencies:
- Added: github.com/gaissmai/bart v0.26.0

Files:
- netstack2/subnet_lookup.go: New BART-based implementation
- netstack2/proxy.go: Removed old map-based implementation, updated to use BART
- Fix prefix canonicalization: use Masked() to handle host bits correctly
  (e.g., 10.0.0.5/24 and 10.0.0.0/24 are now treated as equal)
- Fix empty trie cleanup: use BART's Size() method to check if trie is empty
  instead of relying on rules slice length, preventing stale entries
- Fix go.mod: move BART from indirect to direct dependencies

These fixes ensure proper bookkeeping and prevent memory leaks from
empty tries hanging around after rule removal.
@LaurenceJJones
LaurenceJJones force-pushed the optimize-subnet-lookup-bart branch from ed34e91 to 9738565 Compare February 22, 2026 14:22
@oschwartz10612
oschwartz10612 marked this pull request as ready for review March 3, 2026 02:09
@oschwartz10612
oschwartz10612 self-requested a review March 3, 2026 02:09
@oschwartz10612
oschwartz10612 changed the base branch from main to dev March 3, 2026 02:09
@oschwartz10612
oschwartz10612 merged commit ec399e9 into fosrl:dev Mar 3, 2026
12 of 13 checks passed
mrkhachaturov pushed a commit to mrkhachaturov/newt that referenced this pull request Jun 15, 2026
…up-bart

perf(netstack2): optimize subnet rule matching with BART

Former-commit-id: ec399e9
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants