From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 2/3] net: fix enforcing of fragment queue hash list depth
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:35:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1366810523.26911.495.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1366382991.16391.6.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 07:49 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 14:19 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>
> > When removing the LRU system (which is the real bottleneck, see perf
> > tests in cover mail), and doing direct hash cleaning we are trading-in
> > accuracy.
[...]
> > The reason I don't want a too big hash table is the following.
> >
> > Worst case 1024 buckets * 130K bytes = 133 MBytes, which on smaller
> > embedded systems is a lot of kernel memory we are permitting a remote
> > host to "lock-down".
>
> Thats pretty irrelevant, memory is limited by the total amount of memory
> used by fragments, not by hash table size.
>
> Its called /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ipfrag_high_thresh
I was talking about patch-03, where I do "direct hash cleaning", and
have moved the mem limit "ipfrag_high_thresh" into the hash cleaning
step.
It seems we are talking past each-other...
--Jesper
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-24 13:35 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
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 [this message]
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=1366810523.26911.495.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).