netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Cc: "liujian (CE)" <liujian56@huawei.com>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Wangkefeng (Kevin)" <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
	"weiyongjun (A)" <weiyongjun1@huawei.com>,
	brouer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: Question about ip_defrag
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:22:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170830142208.1c08bbaa@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170830115820.GC9993@breakpoint.cc>

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:58:20 +0200
Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> wrote:

> Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > I take 2) back.  Its wrong to do this, for large NR_CPU values it
> > > would even overflow.  
> > 
> > Alternatively solution 3:
> > Why do we want to maintain a (4MBytes) memory limit, across all CPUs?
> > Couldn't we just allow each CPU to have a memory limit?  
> 
> Consider ipv4, ipv6, nf ipv6 defrag, 6lowpan, and 8k cpus... This will
> render any limit useless.

With 8K CPUs I agree, that this might be a bad idea!

> > > > To me it looks like we/I have been using the wrong API for comparing
> > > > against percpu_counters.  I guess we should have used __percpu_counter_compare().    
> > > 
> > > Are you sure?  For liujian use case (64 cores) it looks like we would
> > > always fall through to percpu_counter_sum() so we eat spinlock_irqsave
> > > cost for all compares.
> > > 
> > > Before we entertain this we should consider reducing frag_percpu_counter_batch
> > > to a smaller value.  
> > 
> > Yes, I agree, we really need to lower/reduce the frag_percpu_counter_batch.
> > As you say, else the __percpu_counter_compare() call will be useless
> > (around systems with >= 32 CPUs).
> > 
> > I think the bug is in frag_mem_limit().  It just reads the global
> > counter (fbc->count), without considering other CPUs can have upto 130K
> > that haven't been subtracted yet (due to 3M low limit, become dangerous
> > at >=24 CPUs).  The  __percpu_counter_compare() does the right thing,
> > and takes into account the number of (online) CPUs and batch size, to
> > account for this.  
> 
> Right, I think we should at very least use __percpu_counter_compare
> before denying a new frag queue allocation request.
> 
> I'll create a patch.

Oh, I've already started working on a patch, that I'm testing now.  But
if you want to take the assignment then I'm fine with that!.  I just
though that it was my responsibility to fix, given I introduced
percpu_counter usage (back in 2013-01-28 / 6d7b857d541e).

-- 
Best regards,
  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
  MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
  LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-30 12:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <4F88C5DDA1E80143B232E89585ACE27D018F07E2@DGGEMA502-MBX.china.huawei.com>
2017-08-24 13:53 ` Question about ip_defrag Jesper Dangaard Brouer
     [not found]   ` <4F88C5DDA1E80143B232E89585ACE27D018F0AE1@DGGEMA502-MBX.china.huawei.com>
2017-08-24 18:59     ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-08-25  1:33       ` liujian (CE)
2017-08-28  8:08       ` liujian (CE)
2017-08-28 14:00         ` Florian Westphal
2017-08-29  7:20           ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-08-29  7:44             ` liujian (CE)
2017-08-29  7:53             ` Florian Westphal
2017-08-30 10:58               ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-08-30 11:58                 ` Florian Westphal
2017-08-30 12:22                   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2017-08-29  7:40           ` liujian (CE)
2017-08-29 13:01           ` liujian (CE)
2017-08-29 13:46             ` Florian Westphal
2017-08-30  1:52               ` liujian (CE)

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=20170830142208.1c08bbaa@redhat.com \
    --to=brouer@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=fw@strlen.de \
    --cc=liujian56@huawei.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=weiyongjun1@huawei.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).