From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hannes Frederic Sowa Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 2/4] net: increase frag hash size Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 05:26:26 +0200 Message-ID: <20130425032626.GA21406@order.stressinduktion.org> References: <20130424154624.16883.40974.stgit@dragon> <20130424154822.16883.93014.stgit@dragon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: "David S. Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer Return-path: Received: from order.stressinduktion.org ([87.106.68.36]:33835 "EHLO order.stressinduktion.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932118Ab3DYD01 (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 23:26:27 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130424154822.16883.93014.stgit@dragon> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 05:48:31PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > Increase fragmentation hash bucket size to 1024 from old 64 elems. > > After we increased the frag mem limits (in commit v3.8-rc3-503-gc2a9366) > the hash size of 64 elements is simply too small. Also considering > the mem limit is per netns and the hash table is shared for all netns. > > For the embedded people, note that this increase will change the hash > table/array from using approx 1 Kbytes to 16 Kbytes. > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer If this change goes in and patch 1 does not get applied I do think we can even lower the INETFRAGS_MAXDEPTH a bit (altough I don't see a need for that because of stability issues)? It would just decrease latency a bit in case someone attacks the hash buckets directly. Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa Thanks, Hannes