From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Eugene Teo <eugene@redhat.com>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] af_unix: limit unix_tot_inflight
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 16:18:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1290611906.3464.66.camel@edumazet-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877hg2g4re.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Le mercredi 24 novembre 2010 à 15:44 +0100, Andi Kleen a écrit :
> Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > diff --git a/net/unix/garbage.c b/net/unix/garbage.c
> > index c8df6fd..40df93d 100644
> > --- a/net/unix/garbage.c
> > +++ b/net/unix/garbage.c
> > @@ -259,9 +259,16 @@ static void inc_inflight_move_tail(struct unix_sock *u)
> > }
> >
> > static bool gc_in_progress = false;
> > +#define UNIX_INFLIGHT_TRIGGER_GC 16000
>
> It would be better to define this as a percentage of
> lowmem.
>
I knew somebody would suggest this ;)
Hmm, why bother ?
Do you think 16000 is too big ? Too small ?
1) What would be the percentage of memory ? 1%, 0.001 % ?
On a 16TB machine, a percentage will still give huge latencies to the
poor guy that hit the unix_gc().
With 16000, the max latency I had was 11.5 ms (on an Intel E5540
@2.53GHz), instead of more than 2000 ms
I guess it would make more sense to limit to the size of cpu cache
anyway.
2) We currently allocate 4096 bytes (on x86_64) to store one file
pointer, or 2048 bytes on x86_32.
But we can store in it up to 255 files.
I posted a patch to shrink this to 32 or 16 bytes. Should we then
change the heuristic ?
3) Really who needs more than 16000 inflight unix files ?
(inflight unix files means : af_unix file descriptors that were sent
(sendfd()) through af_unix, not yet garbage collected.).
4) If we autotune a limit at boot time as a lowmem percentage, some guys
then want a /proc/sys/net/core/max_unix_inflight sysctl , just for
completeness. One extra sysctl...
I cant see valid uses but programs designed to stress our stack.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-24 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <AANLkTi=Q967xpX0KLMwX-=_4_1AKO5wjHEuJ1TrNjCj9@mail.gmail.com>
2010-11-23 23:11 ` Unix socket local DOS (OOM) Eric Dumazet
2010-11-23 23:25 ` Vegard Nossum
2010-11-24 0:09 ` [PATCH net-next-2.6] scm: lower SCM_MAX_FD Eric Dumazet
2010-11-24 19:17 ` David Miller
2010-11-24 9:18 ` [PATCH] af_unix: limit unix_tot_inflight Eric Dumazet
2010-11-24 14:44 ` Andi Kleen
2010-11-24 15:18 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2010-11-24 16:25 ` Andi Kleen
2010-11-24 17:14 ` David Miller
2010-11-26 8:50 ` Michal Hocko
2010-11-27 2:27 ` David Miller
2010-11-29 10:37 ` Michal Hocko
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=1290611906.3464.66.camel@edumazet-laptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eugene@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox