netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Olaf Kirch <okir@suse.de>
To: Olaf Hering <olh@suse.de>
Cc: "Bill Rugolsky Jr." <brugolsky@telemetry-investments.com>,
	netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: limited number if iptable rules on 64bit hosts
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 12:19:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050203111939.GI31570@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050202225258.GA15563@suse.de>

On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 11:52:58PM +0100, Olaf Hering wrote:
> > I don't have time to look now [I'm running for the door],
> > but that's possibly the vmalloc() limit of 64M (67108864) ?
> 
> maybe.
> ->size is a userprovided value, havent looked closely at iptables
> source. It seems we have to live with this limitation.

The problem is two-fold. netfilter tries to allocate some data
per-CPU and does

	vmalloc(sizeof(struct ipt_table_info)
	                + SMP_ALIGN(tmp.size) * NR_CPUS);

At 3445 rules, tmp.size is 524272 (why does it want that much memory? I
would expect the only data that's per-CPU is the packet and byte
counters).

In some of our kernel configurations, NR_CPUS is 128 or even more,
and we run into a vmalloc limit here.

vmalloc wants to allocate an arrays of struct page pointers, and on
a 64bit platform this means you're limited to 131072 / 8 = 16384
pages, or 67108864 bytes. In the example Olaf H posted, we fail at
128 + 524272 * 128 = 67108992 bytes, i.e. 16385 pages.

So I guess it all boils down to why netfilter needs 150-odd bytes
per rule and CPU.

Olaf
-- 
Olaf Kirch   |  --- o --- Nous sommes du soleil we love when we play
okir@suse.de |    / | \   sol.dhoop.naytheet.ah kin.ir.samse.qurax

  reply	other threads:[~2005-02-03 11:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-02-02 13:38 limited number if iptable rules on 64bit hosts Olaf Hering
2005-02-02 22:25 ` Olaf Hering
2005-02-02 22:38   ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2005-02-02 22:52     ` Olaf Hering
2005-02-03 11:19       ` Olaf Kirch [this message]
2005-02-03 18:48         ` David S. Miller
2005-02-03 18:59           ` Olaf Hering
2005-02-03 19:00             ` David S. Miller
2005-02-03 19:33               ` Bart De Schuymer
2005-02-03 21:35               ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.

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=20050203111939.GI31570@suse.de \
    --to=okir@suse.de \
    --cc=brugolsky@telemetry-investments.com \
    --cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=olh@suse.de \
    /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).