From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Sridhar Samudrala <sri@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
mpm@selenic.com, ak@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] TCP/IP Critical socket communication mechanism
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:11:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051221091114.GA8495@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1134758299.10691.28.camel@w-sridhar2.beaverton.ibm.com>
Hi!
> > If it is only one place, why not pre-allocate one "I'm sick now"
> > skb and hold onto it. Any bigger solution seems to snowball into
> > a huge mess.
>
> But the problem is even sending/receiving a single packet can cause
> multiple dynamic allocations in the networking path all the way from
> the sockets layer->transport->ip->driver.
> To successfully send a packet, we may have to do arp, send acks and
> create cached routes etc. So my patch tried to identify the allocations
> that are needed to succesfully send/receive packets over a pre-established
> socket and adds a new flag GFP_CRITICAL to those calls.
> This doesn't make any difference when we are not in emergency. But when
> we go into emergency, VM will try to satisfy these allocations from a
> critical pool if the normal path leads to failure.
>
> We go into emergency when some management app detects that a swap device
> is about to fail(we are not yet in OOM, but will enter OOM soon). In order
> to avoid entering OOM, we need to send a message over a critical socket to
> a remote server that can initiate failover and switch to a different swap
> device. The switchover will happen within 2 minutes after it is initiated.
> In a cluster environment, the remote server also sends a message to other
> nodes which are also running the management app so that they also enter
> emergency. Once we successfully switch to a different swap device, the remote
> server sends a message to all the nodes and they come out of emergency.
>
> During the period of emergency, all other communications can block. But
> guranteeing the successful delivery of the critical messages will help
> in making sure that we do not enter OOM situation.
Why not do it the other way? "If you don't hear from me for 2 minutes,
do a switchover". Then all you have to do is _not_ to send a packet --
easier to do.
Anything else seems overkill.
Pavel
--
Thanks, Sharp!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-12-21 9:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-14 9:12 [RFC][PATCH 0/3] TCP/IP Critical socket communication mechanism Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-14 9:22 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-14 17:55 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-14 18:41 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-14 19:20 ` David Stevens
2005-12-15 3:39 ` Matt Mackall
2005-12-15 4:30 ` David S. Miller
2005-12-15 5:02 ` Matt Mackall
2005-12-15 5:23 ` David S. Miller
2005-12-15 5:48 ` Matt Mackall
2005-12-15 5:53 ` Nick Piggin
2005-12-15 5:56 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-12-15 8:44 ` David Stevens
2005-12-15 8:58 ` David S. Miller
2005-12-15 9:27 ` David Stevens
2005-12-15 5:42 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-15 6:06 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-12-15 7:37 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-15 8:21 ` David S. Miller
2005-12-15 8:35 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-12-15 8:55 ` [RFC] Fine-grained memory priorities and PI Kyle Moffett
2005-12-15 9:04 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-15 12:51 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-12-15 13:31 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-15 12:45 ` Con Kolivas
2005-12-15 12:58 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-12-15 13:02 ` Con Kolivas
2005-12-16 2:09 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/3] TCP/IP Critical socket communication mechanism Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-16 17:48 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-12-16 18:38 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-21 9:11 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2005-12-21 9:39 ` David Stevens
2005-12-14 20:16 ` Jesper Juhl
2005-12-14 20:25 ` Ben Greear
2005-12-14 20:49 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2005-12-14 21:55 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-14 22:09 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2005-12-14 22:39 ` Ben Greear
2005-12-14 23:42 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-15 1:54 ` Mitchell Blank Jr
2005-12-15 11:38 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2005-12-15 11:47 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-12-15 13:00 ` jamal
2005-12-15 13:07 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-12-15 13:32 ` jamal
[not found] <5jUjW-8nu-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <5jWYp-3K1-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <5jXhZ-4kj-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
2005-12-16 8:35 ` Bodo Eggert
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=20051221091114.GA8495@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@suse.cz \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shemminger@osdl.org \
--cc=sri@us.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).