All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
Cc: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>,
	Netfilter Developers <netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Network Development list <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Subject: Re: 32 core net-next stack/netfilter "scaling"
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 18:07:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <498090C1.5020400@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49808708.3050502@trash.net>

Patrick McHardy a écrit :
> Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> Rick Jones a écrit :
>>> Anyhow, the spread on trans/s/netperf is now 600 to 500 or 6000, which
>>> does represent an improvement.
>>>
>>
>> Yes indeed you have a speedup, tcp conntracking is OK.
>>
>> You now hit the nf_conntrack_lock spinlock we have in generic
>> conntrack code (net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c)
>>
>> nf_ct_refresh_acct() for instance has to lock it.
>>
>> We really want some finer locking here.
> 
> That looks more complicated since it requires to take multiple locks
> occasionally (f.i. hash insertion, potentially helper-related and
> expectation-related stuff), and there is the unconfirmed_list, where
> fine-grained locking can't really be used without changing it to
> a hash.
>

Yes its more complicated, but look what we did in 2.6.29 for tcp/udp
 sockets, using RCU to have lockless lookups.
Yes, we still take a lock when doing an insert or delete at socket
bind/unbind time.

We could keep a central nf_conntrack_lock to guard insertions/deletes
from hash and unconfirmed_list.

But *normal* packets that only need to change state of one particular
connection could use RCU (without spinlock) to locate the conntrack,
then lock the found conntrack to perform all state changes.



  reply	other threads:[~2009-01-28 17:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-01-26 22:15 32 core net-next stack/netfilter "scaling" Rick Jones
2009-01-26 23:10 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-26 23:14   ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-01-26 23:19   ` Rick Jones
2009-01-27  9:10     ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-27  9:15       ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-27 11:29         ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-27 11:37           ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-27 16:23         ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-27 17:33           ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-27 18:02             ` Rick Jones
2009-01-27 19:09               ` Rick Jones
2009-01-27 19:24                 ` Rick Jones
2009-01-27 22:17                   ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-27 22:29                     ` Rick Jones
2009-01-27 22:34                       ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-27 22:43                         ` Rick Jones
2009-01-28 13:55                   ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-28 16:25                     ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-28 17:07                       ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2009-01-28 17:34                         ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-29 15:31                           ` [PATCH] netfilter: unfold two critical loops in ip_packet_match() Eric Dumazet
2009-01-30 15:47                             ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-30 16:54                               ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-30 17:27                                 ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-30 17:27                                   ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-30 17:50                                     ` Andi Kleen
2009-02-09 13:41                                   ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 15:10                                     ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-18 15:21                                       ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 16:33                                         ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-18 16:52                                           ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 17:36                                           ` [PATCH] netfilter: xt_physdev fixes Eric Dumazet
2009-02-18 18:14                                             ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-19  8:00                                               ` [PATCH] netfilter: unfold two loops in physdev_mt() Eric Dumazet
2009-02-19  8:14                                                 ` [PATCH] netfilter: unfold two loops in ip6_packet_match() Eric Dumazet
2009-02-19 10:19                                                   ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-19 10:17                                                 ` [PATCH] netfilter: unfold two loops in physdev_mt() Patrick McHardy
2009-02-20 10:02                             ` [PATCH] netfilter: unfold two critical loops in ip_packet_match() Eric Dumazet
2009-02-20 10:04                               ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-09 14:57                           ` 32 core net-next stack/netfilter "scaling" Patrick McHardy
2009-02-10 18:44   ` Stephen Hemminger

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=498090C1.5020400@cosmosbay.com \
    --to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
    --cc=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rick.jones2@hp.com \
    --cc=shemminger@vyatta.com \
    /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.