Re: [PATCH][IPv6] separation xfrm_lookup from ip6_dst_lookup

["David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>]

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:00:15 -0700 (PDT)
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ^[$B5HF#1QL@^[(B <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> wrote:

> In article <20040801195135.16734846.davem@redhat.com> (at Sun, 1 Aug 2004 19:51:35 -0700), "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> says:
> 
> > On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 17:12:05 +0900
> > Kazunori Miyazawa <kazunori@miyazawa.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > I consider copying flowi(fl_rt) uses too much stack at the moment.
> > > I'll re-send the fixed patch again.
> > 
> > I agree, and let's defer this patch until we
> > resolve that.
> 
> Is the overhead for allocating memory okay?
> Or, do we allcoate some per-cpu memory while ipv6.o initalization phase?
> (check: lock? preemption?)
> Or, will we allocate fl (and fl_rt) per sock{} (ipv6_pinfo{})?
> (ditto.)
> 
> We have similar stack usage in other codes, and 
> I would fix them at the same time.

I think memory allocation will make it worse.

Instead, I would try to arrange order of events such that
single stack copy can be modified.  Something like:

	fl.foo = a;
	fl.bar = b;
	x = flow_lookup(&fl);

	fl.foo = a_2;
	y = other_lookup(&fl);

And I believe this is possible in most if not all of
these cases.