From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Subject: Re: [PATCH net] netlink: do not enter direct reclaim from netlink_dump() Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 12:54:43 -0700 Message-ID: <1475697283.3279.12.camel@gmail.com> References: <1475694798.28155.215.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , netdev , Alexei Starovoitov , Greg Thelen To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f196.google.com ([209.85.192.196]:35635 "EHLO mail-pf0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754004AbcJETyp (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2016 15:54:45 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f196.google.com with SMTP id t25so6725695pfg.2 for ; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 12:54:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1475694798.28155.215.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2016-10-06 at 04:13 +0900, Eric Dumazet wrote: > From: Eric Dumazet > > Since linux-3.15, netlink_dump() can use up to 16384 bytes skb > allocations. > > Due to struct skb_shared_info ~320 bytes overhead, we end up using > order-3 (on x86) page allocations, that might trigger direct reclaim and > add stress. > > The intent was really to attempt a large allocation but immediately > fallback to a smaller one (order-1 on x86) in case of memory stress. > > On recent kernels (linux-4.4), we can remove __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM to > meet the goal. Old kernels would need to remove __GFP_WAIT > > While we are at it, since we do an order-3 allocation, allow to use > all the allocated bytes instead of 16384 to reduce syscalls during > large dumps. > > iproute2 already uses 32KB recvmsg() buffer sizes. > > Alexei provided an initial patch downsizing to SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(16384) > > Fixes: 9063e21fb026 ("netlink: autosize skb lengthes") > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet > Reported-by: Alexei Starovoitov > Cc: Greg Thelen > --- > Note: This will apply to net tree when it has synced with Linus tree. > > net/netlink/af_netlink.c | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/netlink/af_netlink.c b/net/netlink/af_netlink.c > index 627f898c05b96552318a881ce995ccc3342e1576..62bea4591054820eb516ef016214ee23fe89b6e9 100644 > --- a/net/netlink/af_netlink.c > +++ b/net/netlink/af_netlink.c > @@ -1832,7 +1832,7 @@ static int netlink_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len, > /* Record the max length of recvmsg() calls for future allocations */ > nlk->max_recvmsg_len = max(nlk->max_recvmsg_len, len); > nlk->max_recvmsg_len = min_t(size_t, nlk->max_recvmsg_len, > - 16384); > + SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(32768)); > > copied = data_skb->len; > if (len < copied) { > @@ -2083,8 +2083,9 @@ static int netlink_dump(struct sock *sk) > > if (alloc_min_size < nlk->max_recvmsg_len) { > alloc_size = nlk->max_recvmsg_len; > - skb = alloc_skb(alloc_size, GFP_KERNEL | > - __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_NORETRY); > + skb = alloc_skb(alloc_size, > + (GFP_KERNEL & ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM) | > + __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_NORETRY); > } > if (!skb) { > alloc_size = alloc_min_size; > > This code has changed a lot since I first added it in 2011 but this appears to be the right thing to do. I guess the order of operations for the bitwise '&' and the bitwise '~' are correct, I don't have my C manual laying around. Reviewed-by: Greg Rose