From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx()
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 12:01:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47F0B66C.6080404@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080331094823.GA11651@elte.hu>
Ingo Molnar a écrit :
> * Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com> wrote:
>
>
>> I noticed some paths in kernel are very stack aggressive, and on i386
>> with CONFIG_4KSTACKS we were really in a dangerous land, even without
>> my patch.
>>
>> What we call 4K stacks is in fact 4K - sizeof(struct task_struct), so
>> a litle bit more than 2K. [...]
>>
>
> that's just wrong - 4K stacks on x86 are 4K-sizeof(thread_info) - the
> task struct is allocated elsewhere. The patch below runs just fine on
> 4K-stack x86.
>
>
Yes, this error was corrected by Andi already :)
Thank you Ingo but this patch was already suggested by me previously (
http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=120361996713007&w=2 ) and was
rejected, since we can very easily consume all stack space, especially
with 4K stacks.
(try with NFS mounts and XFS for example)
Only safe way is to check available free stack space, since we can nest
loopback_xmit() several time.
In case of protocol errors (like in TCP, if we answer to an ACK by
another ACK, or ICMP loops), we would exhaust stack instead of delaying
packets for next softirq run.
Problem is to check available space :
It depends on stack growing UP or DOWN, and depends on caller running on
process stack, or softirq stack, or even hardirq stack.
> Ingo
>
> ------------->
> Subject: net: loopback speedup
> From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> Date: Mon Mar 31 11:23:21 CEST 2008
>
> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> ---
> drivers/net/loopback.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: linux/drivers/net/loopback.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/drivers/net/loopback.c
> +++ linux/drivers/net/loopback.c
> @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ static int loopback_xmit(struct sk_buff
> lb_stats->bytes += skb->len;
> lb_stats->packets++;
>
> - netif_rx(skb);
> + netif_receive_skb(skb);
>
> return 0;
> }
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-31 10:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-21 18:51 [RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx() Eric Dumazet
2008-02-21 20:14 ` Daniel Lezcano
2008-02-21 23:19 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-02-22 10:19 ` Daniel Lezcano
2008-02-27 2:21 ` David Miller
2008-02-27 7:20 ` Jarek Poplawski
2008-02-27 7:23 ` David Miller
2008-02-27 7:34 ` Jarek Poplawski
2008-03-01 10:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-04 4:55 ` David Miller
2008-03-04 5:15 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-03-04 6:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-23 10:29 ` David Miller
2008-03-23 18:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-23 19:15 ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-29 1:36 ` David Miller
2008-03-29 8:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-29 23:54 ` David Miller
2008-03-31 6:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-31 9:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-31 10:01 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2008-03-31 10:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-01 9:19 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-04-03 14:06 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-03 16:19 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-03-31 10:08 ` David Miller
2008-03-31 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-31 11:02 ` David Miller
2008-03-31 11:36 ` poor network loopback performance and scalability (was: Re: [RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx()) Ingo Molnar
2008-04-21 3:24 ` Herbert Xu
2008-04-21 3:38 ` poor network loopback performance and scalability David Miller
2008-04-21 8:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-21 8:16 ` David Miller
2008-04-21 10:19 ` Herbert Xu
2008-04-21 10:22 ` David Miller
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=47F0B66C.6080404@cosmosbay.com \
--to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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).