All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 2/3] net: fix enforcing of fragment queue hash list depth
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 18:30:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1366648217.26911.302.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130422145431.GA26838@order.stressinduktion.org>

On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 16:54 +0200, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:10:34AM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
[...]
> > Besides, after we have implemented per hash bucket locking (in my change
> > commit 19952cc4 "net: frag queue per hash bucket locking").
> > Then, I don't think it is a big problem that a single hash bucket is
> > being "attacked".
> 
> I don't know, I wouldn't say so. The contention point is now the per
> hash bucket lock but it should show the same symptoms as before.

No, the contention point is the LRU list lock, not the hash bucket lock.
If you perf record/profile the code, you can easily miss that its the
LRU lock, because its inlined.  Try to rerun your tests with noinline
e.g.:


diff --git a/include/net/inet_frag.h b/include/net/inet_frag.h
index 6f41b45..9963b87 100644
--- a/include/net/inet_frag.h
+++ b/include/net/inet_frag.h
@@ -138,14 +138,14 @@ static inline int sum_frag_mem_limit(struct
netns_frags *n
        return res;
 }
 
-static inline void inet_frag_lru_move(struct inet_frag_queue *q)
+static noinline void inet_frag_lru_move(struct inet_frag_queue *q)
 {
        spin_lock(&q->net->lru_lock);
        list_move_tail(&q->lru_list, &q->net->lru_list);
        spin_unlock(&q->net->lru_lock);
 }
 
-static inline void inet_frag_lru_del(struct inet_frag_queue *q)
+static noinline void inet_frag_lru_del(struct inet_frag_queue *q)
 {
        spin_lock(&q->net->lru_lock);
        list_del(&q->lru_list);
@@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ static inline void inet_frag_lru_del(struct
inet_frag_queue 
        spin_unlock(&q->net->lru_lock);
 }
 
-static inline void inet_frag_lru_add(struct netns_frags *nf,
+static noinline void inet_frag_lru_add(struct netns_frags *nf,
                                     struct inet_frag_queue *q)
 {
        spin_lock(&nf->lru_lock);

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-22 17:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-18 21:37 [net-next PATCH 0/3] net: frag code fixes and RFC for LRU removal Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-04-18 21:37 ` [net-next PATCH 1/3] net: fix race bug in fragmentation create code Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-04-19  1:00   ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-04-19  8:09     ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-04-18 21:38 ` [net-next PATCH 2/3] net: fix enforcing of fragment queue hash list depth Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-04-19  0:52   ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-04-19 10:11   ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-19 10:41     ` David Laight
2013-04-19 11:14       ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-19 12:19     ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-04-19 12:45       ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-04-19 14:29         ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-04-19 15:06           ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-04-19 19:44           ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-04-22  9:10             ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-04-22 14:54               ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-04-22 16:30                 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2013-04-22 17:49                 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-04-23  0:20                   ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-04-23 14:19                     ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-04-23 20:54                       ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-04-19 14:42       ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-19 14:45       ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-19 14:45       ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-19 14:49       ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-24 13:35         ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-04-24 15:05           ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-18 21:39 ` [RFC net-next PATCH 3/3] net: remove fragmentation LRU list system Jesper Dangaard Brouer

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1366648217.26911.302.camel@localhost \
    --to=brouer@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.